This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LiteratureWikipedia:WikiProject LiteratureTemplate:WikiProject LiteratureLiterature articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ecuador, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ecuador on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EcuadorWikipedia:WikiProject EcuadorTemplate:WikiProject EcuadorEcuador articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article was created or improved during the BLM/Anti-discrimination edit-a-thon hosted by the Women in Red project from July to December 2020. The editor(s) involved may be new; please assume good faith regarding their contributions before making changes.Women in RedWikipedia:WikiProject Women in RedTemplate:WikiProject Women in RedWomen in Red articles
Article does not strongly support notability of the individualedit
Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
This article is very much written such that it focuses on and establishes the notability of the book The Undocumented Americans, rather than the notability of the author. Bueller 007 (talk) 14:52, 26 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Generally having written one notable book is sufficient to meet WP:NAUTHOR. Innisfree987 (talk) 15:02, 26 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 3 years ago7 comments2 people in discussion
Hey, Wewantwillkie, the inclusion of a personal life section is pretty standard. I'm not sure why you're objecting to the inclusion of these details. Let's discuss. —valereee (talk) 10:26, 30 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
If it’s possible, I agree with you both? A personal life section is standard, but I was also uncomfortable with the level of detail, which seemed a bit intrusive. I think I would support reducing the section to:
Cornejo Villavicencio has written about her mental illness, which she says her doctors attribute to the trauma of her childhood separation. She lives in New Haven, Connecticut with her spouse, Talya Zemach-Bersin.
Innisfree987, thanks! I think the information about DACA and green card received via marriage (and now expired) are important -- her book, which is her main claim to fame, is about undocumented Americans. Her initial brush with fame was for an article she wrote about being undocumented and attending Harvard. Her documentation status is mentioned in literally every article about her. We could put it into another section, but I think it needs to be included somewhere. I don't care about the dog lol. —valereee (talk) 16:06, 30 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Valereee, lol about the dog! Agree her status should be in the article, and it is, both in the lead and in the section about college. I think maybe it’s the blow by blow of her status details that felt a bit much to me—if I were going to make a true policy arg, it would maybe be WP:NOTNEWS. The “as of October 2020..,” is a red flag to me on whether it’s enduring encyclopedic content or more “breaking news” type info that doesn’t make the cut for a true overall summary of her life. Am I making sense—I need more coffee! Innisfree987 (talk) 16:22, 30 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Innisfree987 Neither her former DACA status nor her temporary green card status are mentioned anywhere? I can fit the DACA into the college section, but is there any good place for the temporary green card but the personal section, where we talk about her being married? I get your point about the news, but mentioning DACA without mentioning the change in status seems like leaving info off because it's changeable rather than because, being changeable, it's just breaking news, if you see what I mean. That is, ten years from now, assuming her status has been resolved for good, I'd probably argue for a line saying something like "CV was a DACA recipient, then for a brief period upon her marriage a temporary green card holder, and became a naturalized citizen in 2028" or something similar. It's noteworthy information about her life. It just isn't resolved yet. If she weren't notable because of issues arount her undocumented status, I wouldn't be making this argument, FWIW. I don't care what Fareed Zakaria's immigration status is; that's nothing to do with what he's notable for. —valereee (talk) 16:36, 30 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Valereee, I hear you, so I revisited the sources and the entry itself—I think the main thing that the nitty gritty of her status would clarify is that she’s been able to work, so it does seem worth noting she’s a DACA recipient. Could be noted where she mentions not wanting to write about DACA/DREAMers. Beyond that, the more recent play-by-play doesn’t seem encyclopedic to me yet. Partly because it’s only mentioned once in one source (in 10 years I imagine we’d have more sources either mentioning or not), partly because I don’t see that there’s been any significant change in her life based on one of these adjustments—bottom line, she’s still without permanent status, which is clear from the entry.
Innisfree987, I'm fine with whatever consensus we can come to. If/when there are future mentions of the recent stuff, which is probably likely, we can revisit. No deadlines. :) —valereee (talk) 10:11, 31 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
.jpg){kind=small}
