Talk:Kiki Sanford

Kiki Sanford received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Kiki Sanford was nominated as a Social sciences and society good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (March 16, 2016). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

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 sourced must 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.

Biography: Science and Academia

	Biography portal 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 supported by the science and academia work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Skepticism Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles 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.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Podcasting Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Podcasting, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of notable podcasts and podcast-related information 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.PodcastingWikipedia:WikiProject PodcastingTemplate:WikiProject Podcastingpodcasting articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

University of California Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to University of California, its history, accomplishments and other topics 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.University of CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject University of CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject University of CaliforniaUniversity of California articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This page is within the scope of the UC Davis task force. New members are always welcome!

Women scientists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women scientists, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in science 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 scientistsWikipedia:WikiProject Women scientistsTemplate:WikiProject Women scientistsWomen scientists articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Physiology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physiology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physiology 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.PhysiologyWikipedia:WikiProject PhysiologyTemplate:WikiProject PhysiologyPhysiology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article has been classified as relating to the field of physiology.

Women writers Low‑importance

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Education Low‑importance

	Education portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of education and education-related topics 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.EducationWikipedia:WikiProject EducationTemplate:WikiProject Educationeducation articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

I'd like to question the notability of this article. Is a single award considered "significant coverage?" Adding notability tag pending further analysis by someone who cares. :-) McKorn (talk) 21:54, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, of course that a single award isn't, but she's had an interview in TVWeek, a real magazine. Her radio program has at least 20,000 listeners and has been going for almost a decade. It also had a local TV news story which I cited in its article. So I give her and her show a pass. Diderot's dreams (talk) 04:53, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrite

Just a heads up that I have completed a rewrite of the article. The new version retains all of the valuable information of the previous version, plus more details and basic clean up. With the cancellation of a couple of her shows, Dr. Kiki's career is bound to have many changes and new developments in the coming months, but as of right now, everything in the rewrite should be up to date.Dustinlull (talk) 21:08, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Updating

I've begun work updating this that can be found at Draft:Kiki Sanford. Jerod Lycett (talk) 07:18, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Scientist vs science communicator

I was just comparing how we write about male vs female scientists in the public eye and I think there is a problem that should be addressed. In the first sentence of this article we refer to her solely as "an American science communicator". We can compare this to, for example, Neil deGrasse Tyson who "is an American astrophysicist, cosmologist, author, and science communicator." Or BIll Nye, who isn't actually a PhD scientist, who we refer to as "an American science educator, television presenter, and mechanical engineer." (That is to say, we include his professional qualification in that first sentence.)

I haven't done a comprehensive study of this issue, but thought I'd raise it here in case anyone wants to reflect on it further. I'll edit this page to make it stronger.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 16:43, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jimbo Wales, I've not seen it from the view of generalizing male versus female scientists, but do agree that when it comes to lady biographies, there seems to be an inherent bent towards sexist statements (though well referenced) and downplaying professional achievements. The issue would have to be addressed at an MoS level I guess. Lourdes 15:05, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]