Talk:Lesley Johnson

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).

Australia Low‑importance

	Australia portal Lesley Johnson is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

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.

Women's History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and 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.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women in Red: #1day1woman (2022)

This article was created or improved during the #1day1woman initiative hosted by the Women in Red project in 2022. The editor(s) involved may be new; please assume good faith regarding their contributions before making changes.Women in RedWikipedia:WikiProject Women in RedTemplate:WikiProject Women in RedWomen in Red articles

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: withdrawn by nominator, closed by Victuallers (talk) 11:08, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that in 2004 Lesley Johnson published "Sentenced to Everyday Life: Feminism and the Housewife" and she became a deputy vice chancellor at Griffith University? Source: book here, then see article
alt1... that Lesley Johnson, who is twice an Australian professor emeritus, is an expert on feminism and housewifery?
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Mary Healy (theologian)
- Comment: If you see an error or you can make an improvement then please be bold and make the edit. Sad no image ... anyone got one?

Created by Oronsay (talk). Nominated by Victuallers (talk) at 10:52, 18 January 2022 (UTC).[reply]

I will review this as per QPQ requirements. Howard the Duck (talk) 13:12, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- So, the hook is sourced to Google Books. I have sought assistance at WT:RS if this falls under WP:RS. We'll do a full review once they have an advice on this. Howard the Duck (talk) 21:36, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  - Can a hook have two sources? The bio has a reference to a review of the book and, separately, a ref for her position at Griffith University?--Oronsay (talk) 04:33, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    - A hook can have several refs "The Antipodean, outstanding, Wikipedian who..." might require three. Victuallers (talk) 08:02, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Plagiarism: This originally was found to be "Violation Possible" but upon closer inspection the "violations" were proper names (which were rather long) and lengthy quote on why she was appointed Member of the Order of Australia. Hookinterest: To be honest it is uninteresting, but I've read through the article and cannot come up with a more interesting one. Howard the Duck (talk) 15:35, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The hook needs to be interesting to be promoted. You just said it wasn't. I agree with you also. She published a book, like so many people have done, and that book doesn't have an article. She also has a career, like so many people have, without saying anything interesting about it. SL93 (talk) 00:03, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Howard the Duck SL93 (talk) 00:03, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If that's the case, we'd need an interesting hook for this to go. Howard the Duck (talk) 05:43, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm drawing a blank as well—Victuallers, got anything? Ping Kavyansh.Singh and EEng if not. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 09:16, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alt1 might rise a bit above the "not interesting" judgement. @Oronsay: may have a view. If passed then this is a good candidate for Women's History Month. Victuallers (talk) 09:29, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alt1 is just as uninteresting as Alt0. Howard the Duck (talk) 12:22, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm drawing a blank on a possible hook at the moment. I would suggest checking if there's anything known about her personal life and see if there could be something usable there. Otherwise I'd recommend marking the nomination for closure for not having anything hook-worthy. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:40, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]