Jump to content

Talk:Andrea James

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Starburst9 (talk | contribs) at 18:59, 22 May 2016 (Is Andrea James controversial?: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Is Andrea James controversial?

Irn removed the adjective "controversial," which I had added to this article. I recognize that BLPs need to be written conservatively, but I have been reading around on the topic, and it's hard to escape the word. Many (most?) of the RS's about her (other than the ones she herself wrote) associate her with one or another controversy and her involvement in them. Many of her views have been hotly contested by experts in various fields, and many (most?) of the BLPs of involved in the issue refer to them as controversial scientists, etc. It's a little hard to swallow that she is the only non-controversial person involved. (Even her activity on wikipedia has been the subject of controversy.) I realize she was (once) a big figure on WP, but if any BLP anywhere on WP is going to be said to be controversial, it's hard to think that this one would not be. Irn (and others): What standard do you think should be used?Starburst9 (talk) 18:59, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]