Talk:Josie Brown Childs
Did you know nomination
[edit]
( )
- ... that community activist Josie Brown Childs had the title of "Matriarch of the Movement"?
- ALT1: ... that community activist Josie Brown Childs organized the 16th Annual Duke Ellington Conference in 1998, which included the first performance of his musical "My People" since its 1963 premiere? Source: https://bmrc.lib.uchicago.edu/portal/view/?id=BMRC.HARSH.CHILDS.xml
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Chrystal (musician) and Template:Did you know nominations/Trey McKenney
Created by SL93 (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 2. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 419 past nominations.
SL93 (talk) 02:49, 8 December 2024 (UTC).
- Comment. Not a review, but in examining the article it relies heavily on primary materials. The History Makers source should probably directly link to the interview transcript (https://www.thehistorymakers.org/sites/default/files/A2013_248_EAD.pdf) and give credit to Larry Crowe as the interviewer. I would consider this a primary source. I added an independent obituary with a byline but it consisted mostly of quotes so I'm not sure how independent that is either. The Black Metropolis Research Consortium source should be replaced with the original at https://www.chipublib.org/fa-josie-brown-childs-papers/ These papers are housed at the the Chicago Public Library, Vivian G. Harsh Research Collection, Woodson Regional library and were processed/compiled by Elizabeth Loch and Emily Minehart who should be attributed as the authors/compilers of the file. Unfortunately neither of these two biographies have a named authors and they both have close attachments to primary materials (one being principally an interview with the subject with an attached non-bylined biography, and the other papers donated by the subject housed at a library with again a non by-lined biography). It's not clear how independent these sources are from Childs, although I don't doubt they are accurate. The article is also not compliant with MOS:CHRONOLOGICAL. I do think this person is notable, I'm just not certain if the sources currently in the article clearly demonstrate WP:SIGCOV which is a concern for promoting this to the main page.4meter4 (talk) 03:03, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- 4meter4 As for chronological, are you only referring to the death being mentioned under the personal life and death section? SL93 (talk) 03:07, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- @SL93 Yes. Biographies should be presented in chronological order; ending with a person's death and maybe a legacy section covering after death significance if appropriate. Generally an "early life and education" section opens an article. Then a "career section". Then a "later life" section which includes a person's death as well as activities in retirement. If possible, it's best to interweave personal life information into the article's other sections and not separate it out in order to maintain chronological presentation. Best.4meter4 (talk) 03:17, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- 4meter4 I did that with a death section until the point that editors whined about me having a short section with a few sentences or less. That caused me to not include death details in their own section for a few years up until you saying something about it. SL93 (talk) 03:20, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- How do these sources look? - [1], [2], [3], and [4]. SL93 (talk) 03:32, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- @SL93 I'll look at the sources and get back to you shortly on that point. It is true that short subsections are also problematic under WP:MOS guidelines. If there isn't enough content for a later life section, it's perfectly fine to have a single "Career and later life" subheading. You can bundle topics under one section. Likewise the opposite is true when writing on a person where there is more detail. In those cases you can extrapolate out more diverse subheadings if/when it is appropriate. There is flexibility to expand, remove, and combine subheadings as long you follow both the general MOS and the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biography guidelines. Every article isn't going to look the same, but biographies do need to present content in chronological order as much as possible. Best.4meter4 (talk) 03:42, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- @SL93 I think those sources look great, and would do a lot to help demonstrate SIGCOV. Please take the time to work those into the article, and also please make the adjustments to the extant sources that I mentioned above if you haven't already. Doing all of that should prevent any notability issues being raised while it is on the main page. The main thing is we don't want an article to get pulled when it is on the main page at DYK because somebody decides to take it to AFD. It's not a good look for the project. Having a good number of by-lined sources helps prevent that. Best.4meter4 (talk) 03:50, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. I will leave a note here once I'm done. SL93 (talk) 03:53, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- I'm done. SL93 (talk) 02:20, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. I will leave a note here once I'm done. SL93 (talk) 03:53, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- @SL93 I think those sources look great, and would do a lot to help demonstrate SIGCOV. Please take the time to work those into the article, and also please make the adjustments to the extant sources that I mentioned above if you haven't already. Doing all of that should prevent any notability issues being raised while it is on the main page. The main thing is we don't want an article to get pulled when it is on the main page at DYK because somebody decides to take it to AFD. It's not a good look for the project. Having a good number of by-lined sources helps prevent that. Best.4meter4 (talk) 03:50, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- @SL93 I'll look at the sources and get back to you shortly on that point. It is true that short subsections are also problematic under WP:MOS guidelines. If there isn't enough content for a later life section, it's perfectly fine to have a single "Career and later life" subheading. You can bundle topics under one section. Likewise the opposite is true when writing on a person where there is more detail. In those cases you can extrapolate out more diverse subheadings if/when it is appropriate. There is flexibility to expand, remove, and combine subheadings as long you follow both the general MOS and the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biography guidelines. Every article isn't going to look the same, but biographies do need to present content in chronological order as much as possible. Best.4meter4 (talk) 03:42, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- @SL93 Yes. Biographies should be presented in chronological order; ending with a person's death and maybe a legacy section covering after death significance if appropriate. Generally an "early life and education" section opens an article. Then a "career section". Then a "later life" section which includes a person's death as well as activities in retirement. If possible, it's best to interweave personal life information into the article's other sections and not separate it out in order to maintain chronological presentation. Best.4meter4 (talk) 03:17, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
I wasn't reviewing so someone else can review this. Best.4meter4 (talk) 03:52, 9 December 2024 (UTC)