Talk:Dorothy King

Top

It was tagged for deletion within seconds of posting, and before I had a chance to write anything! Now there seems no point filling it in if it's going to go!

I heard from one source, a University blogger so maybe semi-reliable, that she is an American. Steve Dufour (talk) 05:21, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

NN-tagged and expert-verify tagged Dec 2008. Excuse me, Dorothy. Gregorik (talk) 16:04, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I added some sources. I think she would pass WP:N, although not on the A-list of notable people. Steve Dufour (talk) 18:02, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

(Personal attack removed) you may not like her, but I looked at the sources you cited and this was clearly a personal attack on someone I use you hate for some reason - please stick to facts 86.187.44.14 (talk) 19:11, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

why is 91.180.48.239 being allowed to make constant personal attacks? I see she has already asked for her page to be removed in the past, and frankly if these are "encyclopedia"-acceptable entries, I am not surprised 86.187.44.14 (talk) 19:21, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Notability tag

This is appropriate where the creator of an article hasn't made clear why they think the person is notable, and hasn't given sources to back it up. This article makes clear why some think she's notable, and gives sources. If you disagree with her notability, take it to AFD. I'm not defending the article, and don't claim she's notable. But, I don't want a permanent maintenance tag, that probably won't ever be addressed. --Rob (talk) 04:19, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't think you understand what the notability tag is for. Merely asserting that she is notable is not enough, it has to be demonstrated. Writing a book and being a blogger isn't notable by itself, and if that's why the person who wrote this thinks she's notable, that doesn't cut it. The tag is indicating that notability has not been demonstrated to the standards of Wikipedia's notability standards and needs to be demonstrated. You can't insist I have to take it to AFD in order to place the tag there, or else there would be no reason to EVER have that tag, as everything would always go to AFD. Your argument makes no sense. If the notability issues won't ever be addressed then the tag SHOULD be up there permanently, or until eventually the article is deleted. We don't remove tags just because you think other editors are too lazy to fix problems. DreamGuy (talk) 04:48, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

The "Notability" tag gives the article's editors a chance to explain why the consider the person notable, and show their sources. That's been done. Now, it's up to the community, in an AFD, to decide if the explanation of notability, which is in the article, is sufficient. A decision that it is notable, or a decision to delete it, would both be better outcomes than a permanent "Notability" tag. --Rob (talk) 05:07, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Nominated for Deletion

Two reasons for nominating for deletion.

Firstly, King is surely not notable enough to warrant a wikipedia biography. Her written work is neither significant nor prolific - there are countless academics and indeed students, who have published more opinion pieces/blog articles etc., most of whom also don't warrant a wiki biography. Additionally, she appears to have stopped publishing - her blog is inactive, her twitter is private and she hasn't published academic work or opinion-pieces for some years. She doesn't appear to be working as an archaeologist (or in a relevant/linked field).

Secondly, what there is of her biography reads more like a fluffed up promotional piece. There is absolutely no actual information on her career such as where and when she did her PhD, where she has been employed, what sites she has excavated or worked on - or indeed anything (again) to justify her biography. There is also no relevant or interesting personal information - nothing on childhood, significant relationships, family, achievements - in short, once again, no detail that would support her being significant enough for a wiki bio. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.172.153.147 (talk) 01:43, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

I've copied this nomination to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dorothy King (2nd nomination), where the discussion will take place. – Joe (talk) 10:04, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

A small request.

I realise it’s not ‘good form’ to comment on or edit one’s Wikipedia page - frankly I agree that I’m not notable, I try to lead a very quiet life, and would be quite happy if the page were deleted. Obviously, people are allowed to have their opinions.

There are however a few factual errors in the profile.

I was born in 1973 not 1975. I was born in London. James T. King is me step-father not my father - I called him dad, but he is not actually my father.

I did not do the “interview” footnote 12.

Best wishes, Dorothy DLVLK (talk) 09:09, 1 October 2022 (UTC)