Jump to content

Talk:Carol Tavris

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

File:Carol Tavris lecturing Cuidad 2009.jpg Deleted

[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Carol Tavris lecturing Cuidad 2009.jpg, has been deleted from Wikimedia Commons by ZooFari for the following reason: No permission since 29 April 2011

What should I do?

You can remove the code for this image from the article text (which can look messy), however a different bot may already have done so. You could also try to search for new images to replace the one deleted. If you think the deletion was in error please raise the issue at Commons.

This notification is provided by a Bot, currently under trial --CommonsNotification (talk) 01:06, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re-writing Carol Tavris' page

[edit]

I think that Travis's page is lacking in information and sources and so I'm going to attempt to take a stab at rewriting it. I plan on using more current material (as well as old material). If anyone knows of great citations or has any ideas, please let me know! I would love to hear them. Just post them on the talk page and I will check back here every week.

Because it appears that this page needs a complete re-haul and rewrite, this is something that I'm going to need to do on my own space. Once I'm completely finished with the rewrite, I'll launch it so everyone can pick it apart and make any needed edits.

I plan on taking about two months to get this done. I would like to have this page rewritten by March 21st so stand by for the changes then! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laurencarr24 (talkcontribs) 23:13, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re-write complete

[edit]

I have finished my re-write of Carol Tavris' page. I tried to be accurate and have sources for everything I stated. However, I was unable to find a source that proved she graduated from Brandeis summa cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa. She said it, but other than her word, there is nothing written yet that I have found.

A couple other thoughts:

  • Because I haven't read her books, if anyone has any summaries or additions to make regarding her books, it might be a good idea to add them in.
  • If anyone has access to the Times Literary Supplement, perhaps you could add links to the three articles I listed. I know she wrote them, I just can't find them online.

I have no problems if others improve the page, I know I didn't read every article or interview involving Carol, so I'm sure there could be more to add. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laurencarr24 (talkcontribs) 02:44, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Carol Tavris. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:44, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

In case there's something here that could be used as a reference or used to find references. --Ronz (talk) 18:29, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:EL and WP:LINKFARM concerning why such lengthy lists are not appropriate. --Ronz (talk) 23:46, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Interviews
Public talks
Articles

Published material

[edit]

The extent to which the life of the public intellectual is indeed given to public exposition of the person has been recently eliminated from the main article page.

The completed links to Published material in the article page prior to this recent edit were:
Interviews
Public talks
Articles

--Laurencebeck (talk) 00:48, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What's your concern? Have you looked at WP:EL and WP:LINKFARM? --Ronz (talk) 16:09, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ACLU

[edit]

@Nightscream: Despite your objections, the inclusion of the statement "As of 2014 Tavris was a member of the American Civil Liberties Union" is disputed, as it has been removed at least three times[1][2][3] by two different editors (myself and Ctavris). Per WP:VNOTSUFF, the onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content. Here's why I don't think it should be included: it's trivia apparently based flimsily on a single primary source (and see WP:BLPPRIMARY). Unless I'm missing something, the name Carol Tavris appears only once in this annual report in a list of supporters. From this alone all we know is that someone named Carol Tavris gave an unspecified donation to the ACLU in 2014. We don't know if she was a supporter the previous year, nor the subsequent year. We can't even be sure it is the same Carol Tavris as the subject of this article (Don't build the Frankenstein) (Previous versions of the article had more blatant of original research, stating "Tavris, like her mother Dorothy, has been a lifelong member of the American Civil Liberties Union.", which certainly can not be inferred from the given source). Even if it is ascertained that it is the same Tavris, do any reliable sources connect Tavris to the ACLU in a meaningful way? If some Wikipedia editors are the only voices saying it should be mentioned, it probably shouldn't be mentioned, otherwise it's giving undue weight to minor aspects per WP:PROPORTION and WP:UNDUE. Note that Wikipedia is not everything. Please provide reliable sources that give weight and context to any mention of ACLU affiliation. --Animalparty! (talk) 00:19, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]