Talk:Lisa Brennan-Jobs/Archive 1

Archive 1

Verification

The Bio section on the right states "Children = Carl Jobs" where is the verification for this? I can find no other refererence that confirms this statement. Also is there any age confirmation for "Carl Jobs" ?

Notability

Steve Jobs has a boy name Bobby Jobs — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.176.108.151 (talk) 19:30, 19 October 2011 (UTC) Please stop redirecting this page to Steve's—Lisa's an individual who has her own life and career, and deserves a proper space on Wikipedia. Ebcase (talk) 05:32, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Don't delete it, maybe merge it with Steven Jobs, but don't delete, she was important in his life and in Apple's history. I think she deserves to be in wikipedia. --Running 18:07, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Why? This person is no more important than me or you, except in the Lisa Computer article.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.163.148.46 (talk) 12:35, 31 January 2010

Because, 88.163.148.46, the article lists four sources, indicating notability per Wikipedia's general notability guideline.--Joshua Issac (talk) 14:18, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

This page reads at best like a resume and at worst like a myspace page. Even if this person's achievements warrant this attention, this should be rewritten for an encyclopedic tone. It reads as though it was written by the subject. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.49.44.154 (talk) 00:47, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Joshua Isaac, you ignorant sycophant. Are you writing from Cupertino? (Apparently you're based in the UK; perhaps you work in an Apple store?) The number of sources, if they aren't *about* the topic/person in question, is completely irrelevant. Of the THREE sources listed, two are about her father. By your standards, nearly every son or daughter of an existing Wikipedia entry warrants his or her own entry, as they'll almost invariably be mentioned in biographical sources on their parents. The third 'source' is a meager bio -- FROM HER COLLEGE NEWSPAPER. Give me a break. Your condescension and pedantic reference to the Wikipedia guidelines are insufferable. This entry should be deleted as soon as possible. The previous editor was absolutely right -- it read's like a resume. Combined with the fact that the person in question has utterly no relevance besides her father's notoriety (and thus at best warrants a brief mention in her father's entry), you have no basis to oppose deletion. This is a case where two anonymous editors (88.163.148.46 and 68.49.44.154) know more about Wikipedia and have made more compelling arguments than three known editors ((Running, Joshua Isaac, and Ebcase). For shame. BasilSeal (talk) 14:01, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Would it be possible for you to watch your tone and keep it "civil", Basil? =//= Johnny Squeaky 07:41, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

This sounds like an advertisement or resume for herself. Does she really deserve a Wiki page? 149.63.60.58 (talk) 22:58, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

She does NOT need her own page. Big deal,she is Steve Jobs daughter and a unknown writer! --99.177.248.92 (talk) 04:31, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

She needs her own page because her dad, the CEO of one of the richest companies in the world, visionary, ect, is a douche and refused to claim paternity for his own child for the first 2 years of her life. This gives us deep insight into a very noteworthy man. This info needs to be recorded in wikipedia and should not be expunged to please the apple fanboys, Steve Jobs, or wiki-stasi, and as it's too much info to be recorded under a Steve Jobs article, it's justified that she has her own page.

Even if we just left her as a mention on her daddy's page whilst deleting hers, people will want to know more and will be frustrated when they click for a link where there should reasonably be a link only to be disappointed by having resorted to google instead, that is, assuming Operation Snow-White(-Leopard) doesn't remove the mention altogether and thus eliminate any mainstream public knowledge of this (rightly) embarrassing bit of history of their dear leader.

I clicked, I was curious, I learned something I didn't know before, clicked again and learnt even more and it had citations. That alone justifies it. Stop trying to censor knowledge. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.246.227.38 (talk) 19:41, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

I think it is a very good question "is she notable enough for her own article". One the one hand, alone by herself, it's very questionable. On the other hand, her father might make her notable. On yet my third hand, there are FAR LESS notable folks with Wikipedia pages... Personally, I don't care, Wikipedia has plenty of hard disk space, in my opinion, this "notability" BS has got *WAY* out of hand, in my opinion the great thing about Wikipedia is the ability to find *obscure* knowledge, knowledge that might even, by definition, be NON-notable. But I think we need to be careful when discussing this, I detect a slight tone of "anti-famous person bias" or "anti-fanboy bias" - not sayin' it's actually there, just a slight hint well within the non-scientific margin of error... What *I* want to see is a "controversy" section that addresses her parentage. Johnny Squeaky (talk) 03:18, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

The real issue is whether she's notable outside of Steve Jobs being her father. The paternity material easily can be (and already is) discussed at Steve Jobs.--Cúchullain ^t/c 15:14, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

No, outside being Jobs' daughter (and having the Lisa named after her), her "notability" does not rise to the level normally required for a free-standing Wikipedia article. It's not an insult or a bad thing or a good thing, just a thing... I don't get an article either. =//= Johnny Squeaky 07:38, 29 October 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnny Squeaky (talk • contribs)

No mention of paternity controversy?

Of course in typical Wikipedia fashion, there is absolutely NO MENTION of the controversy surrounding Lisa Jobs: Steve Jobs denied *in court* that he was the father. This fact is not worthy of mention? Even though it was ALL OVER the news? Not just some minor one inch column with 12 point headline print...

When Jobs had his own illegitimate child, also at the age of 23, he too struggled with his responsibilities. For two years, though already wealthy, he denied paternity while Lisa's mother went on welfare. At one point Jobs even swore in a signed court document that he couldn't be Lisa's father because he was "sterile and infertile, and as a result thereof, did not have the physical capacity to procreate a child." He later acknowledged paternity of Lisa, married Laurene Powell, a Stanford MBA, and fathered three more children. Lisa Brennan-Jobs, now 29, graduated from Harvard and is a writer. - http://money.cnn.com/2008/03/02/news/companies/elkind_jobs.fortune/index2.htm

But of course the man must not be besmirched by facts, as if reality doesn't apply to the Great Man...

And lest you think I'm an Apple Hater, not so. Jobs was a GREAT MAN with a GREAT VISION ans Apple products are (in my opinion) top notch bar none. But really, this is an absolutely notable fact that has been discussed in top name respectable news sources (you know, CNN, NYT, WJ, SFGate...) - but not Wikipedia??? =//= Johnny Squeaky (talk) 03:12, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

The paternity material currently gets two paragraphs and makes up the bulk of this very short article.--Cúchullain ^t/c 15:14, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Apart from that, it's less to do with "the man" and more to do with WP:UNDUE and WP:BLP as it applies to the article's subject - Alison ^❤ 17:55, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I added that. Johnny Squeaky (talk) 05:09, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

External Link

The web site linked () has not been updated since 2009, and shows very little use at that - as most abandoned personal blogs do. Is it still relevant? Perhaps there is something newer that she actually uses? I mean, it's an abandoned personal blog that she clearly didn't spend more than a week or so being interested in... I think the link is worthless and should go. =//= Johnny Squeaky (talk) 05:09, 9 October 2011 (UTC)