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 rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
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 has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Photography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of photography 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.PhotographyWikipedia:WikiProject PhotographyTemplate:WikiProject PhotographyPhotography articles
Latest comment: 7 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
This article needs a lot of work. That said, this edit puzzles me. "this article has only 3 refs and all are from the one source". Only the first, most general assertion is referenced (and they're referenced via three bits of the NYT). This isn't satisfactory; but what's unsatisfactory about exclusive use of the NYT, Lopifalko? (Or do I misunderstand?) -- Hoary (talk) 23:30, 2 April 2017 (UTC)Reply
That edit removed the "Single source" warning. I pointed out that "all are from the one source" to show why that warning should remain. (Or is it me that is misunderstanding your question?) -Lopifalko (talk) 19:19, 3 April 2017 (UTC)Reply
As I view the edit, it adds the "single source" warning. I think that at least one of us is misunderstanding something. (Or conceivably at least one of the browsers we use is displaying something perversely.) Still, we can agree that, problematic though it is, the article now has more than one source. -- Hoary (talk) 00:01, 4 April 2017 (UTC)Reply
Oh, my fault! I have always interpreted "single source" to mean sourced only to one author or organisation – a single source for the refs, rather than a single ref. For example here the single source being The New York Times. I stand corrected. -Lopifalko (talk) 08:47, 4 April 2017 (UTC)Reply
.svg)