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 Start-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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Genealogy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Genealogy 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.GenealogyWikipedia:WikiProject GenealogyTemplate:WikiProject GenealogyGenealogy
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
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.
I have raised this issue elsewhere, now I am going to raise it here. This is not an encyclopedia article, it is an unreferenced genealogical tree with a brief introduction. First, family articles are written in prose - text, not a family tree, needs to be the primary mode of presenting the family. Trees are used to help understand what is described in the body of the article, not as the body of the article. Second, if this is to be about the Sedgwick family, it needs to be about the whole Sedgwick family, not present the immigrant and then skip over almost 200 years and only address one particular cluster. If this is to really be about that one cluster, then the text (and perhaps the page name) needs to be refocused to reflect that (e.g. Theodore Sedgwick family, or even Ellery Sedgwick family). Third, the 'Connected people' section is . . . what? 'connected' is an arbitrary distinction, and a list such as this needs defined inclusion criteria, rather than just being at the whim of individual editors. In most cases, articles don't have a section like this - if the people are 'connected' enough to be noteworthy, then they should be mentioned in the article text. If they are too peripheral to be mentioned in the prose, they shouldn't be stuck on the end. But to incorporate these names into the article text, there actually has to be article text. And every single relationship in the tree needs to either be referenced in the tree, or discussed with full references in the text. Anything that is unreferenced can be removed - that would be the whole tree in this case, and that doesn't leave much of an article. One possibility to consider - maybe the article should be recast to be about the book, rather than the hopeless task of making it about the thousands and thousands of descendants of a 400-year-old family. Finally a note on the family being shaped by tragedy. All families are. Saying this family is adds nothing. Equally important, Wikipedia aims to show, not tell - to provide a description of the family such that the reader sees the situation for themselves, then you don't have to make the statement at all because you have told the reader all about it. Here the opposite is done - making the bold assertion that the family was tragic without providing any details whatever. Agricolae (talk) 23:24, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
