To view an answer, click the [show] link to the right of the question.
Q1: Why isn't there more criticism of Sarkeesian or her work?
A1: Wikipedia policy requires that all material be verifiable to reliable, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy, and that special care is to be taken in any material on living people. Additionally, sources must be reliable for the topic at hand, and their viewpoints must be given appropriate weight in proportion to their prominence among all others. The article reflects the viewpoints represented in reliable sources. See the talk page archives for previous discussions on individual sources.
Q2: I found a YouTube video/blog entry/customer review/forum thread that presents criticism of Sarkeesian's work.
A2: Those kinds of self-published and/or user-generated sources do not comply with Wikipedia's standards for reliable sources. In particular, the biographies of living persons policy prohibits any self-published sources in articles on living people except for a few very specific cases. Including such sources would a) tarnish the quality of Wikipedia's information and b) potentially open up Wikipedia to legal action.
Q3: I think I may have found a new reliable source that presents a viewpoint not yet covered in the article(s).
A3: You are welcome to bring any source up for discussion on the talk page, and the community will determine whether and how it may be included. However, first check the talk page archives to see if it has been discussed before.
This article was nominated for deletion on 14 June 2012. The result of the discussion was keep.
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 Blogging, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.BloggingWikipedia:WikiProject BloggingTemplate:WikiProject BloggingBlogging articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Feminism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Feminism 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.FeminismWikipedia:WikiProject FeminismTemplate:WikiProject FeminismFeminism articles
This article is part of WikiProject Gender studies. This WikiProject aims to improve the quality of articles dealing with gender studies and to remove systematic gender bias from Wikipedia. If you would like to participate in the project, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.Gender studiesWikipedia:WikiProject Gender studiesTemplate:WikiProject Gender studiesGender studies articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games 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.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women 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.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women 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 Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture 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.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which has been designated as a contentious topic.
WARNING: ACTIVE ARBITRATION REMEDIES
This page is subject to discretionary sanctions; any editor who repeatedly or egregiously fails to adhere to applicable policies may be blocked, topic-banned, or otherwise restricted. Note also that editors on this article are subject to a limit of one revert per 24 hours (with exceptions for vandalism or BLP violations). Violation may result in blocks without further warning. Enforcement should be requested at WP:AE.
Also, the article may not be edited by accounts with fewer than 500 edits, or by accounts that are less than 30 days old. Edits made by accounts that do not meet these qualifications may be removed. (Such removals are not subject to any "revert-rule" counting.)
The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:
I'm not Sangdeboeuf, obviously, but I was looking up the cited policy when they reverted your edit, and I would have reverted if they hadn't. You cited MOS:CAPTION, which says In a biography article no caption is necessary for a portrait of the subject pictured alone, but one might be used to give the year, the subject's age, or other circumstances of the portrait along with the name of the subject (emphasis mine). I see that Sangdeboeuf cited MOS:CAPLENGTH, which gives plenty of examples of biographical infobox captions, all of which include the subject's name—save for Elvis Presley, where it mentions an iconic film and scene that he is known for. It seems to me that the MoS calls for "Sarkeesian" in the caption, both explicitly and implicitly. Woodroar (talk) 14:44, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As I said in my edit summary, the image does not simply depict the year "2011". Per WP:CAPTION: One of a caption's primary purposes is to identify the subject of the picture ... Be as unambiguous as practical in identifying the subject. "2011" does not tell the reader who the subject of the image is. The existing caption "Sarkeesian in 2011" does so succinctly and practically. It's normal to caption portraits of biographical subjects this way. MOS:CAPLENGTH gives the example "Cosby in 2010" for Bill Cosby. Not a special situation at all. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 22:24, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging @Sangdeboeuf and JeffSpaceman: I saw your reversions and figured we should discuss it here especially since this page has Contentious Topics measures in place. The "Years active" section in the infobox (copied here for reference) specifically refers to the YouTube channel feministfrequency and is under the "YouTube information" section of the box. Its "About" page links to the official Feminist Frequency websites and social media only, not Sarkeesian's personal website or social media. The channel is specifically part of the FF organization, not Sarkeesian's personal channel (I don't think she has one of her own that I can find, unlike other social media where there is one for her and one for the organization).
Given that, we should either consider the channel to be part of the shutdown of FF organization and mark that in "Years active" for the Youtube channel, or alternatively remove the youtube from the infobox entirely as it is not used by the BLP subject directly. Thoughts? The Wordsmith16:07, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@The Wordsmith: I think that we should remove YouTube from the infobox, given that as you note, it is not directly used by Sarkeesian. Thus, we can keep the years active as running through the present. I don't know if I was looking right at the YouTube information section, I merely thought it was talking about her activity in the world of media criticism, hence why I changed it to "2009-present." I think removing YouTube from the infobox would probably be our best bet here. JeffSpaceman (talk) 16:19, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, "years active" is ambiguous in a biography of a person, since it could seem at first glance to refer to the person or their website, blog, YouTube channel, etc. I understood "years active" to refer to Sarkeesian herself. In any case, the latest video was posted a little over a month ago, so it seems premature to call the channel inactive. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 21:08, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
References
^"Anita Sarkeesian". Virtual International Authority File. Retrieved March 16, 2016.
To view an answer, click the [show] link to the right of the question.
.jpg){kind=small}
