Jump to content

Talk:Patricia Fara

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

Don't tag for deletion

[edit]

The speed with which some add delete tags to new entries is not appreciated nor is it polite. You must give new articles a chance to build before adding these annoying tags. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LarkinToad2010 (talkcontribs) 08:57, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

[edit]

Fara is a prolific author, is a Fellow of an Oxbridge college and lecturer at Cambridge, broadcaster and reviewer. That is grounds for the tags to be removed as this article is better referenced than many biog. stubs on here.LarkinToad2010 (talk) 06:51, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Background?

[edit]

PhD in what? Her approach is socio-political. Dynasteria (talk) 18:49, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PhD in History of Science at Imperial College, 1993, look it up in their catalogue.LarkinToad2010 (talk) 23:20, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gender

[edit]

Fara is one of the few female historians of natural sciences in a male-dominated field, perhaps the only well-known one. So you should not delete it unless deliberately seeking gender imbalance. The article should be undeleted on gender-neutral grounds as she is also a widely-known populist author in her field.LarkinToad2010 (talk) 21:53, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bibliography

[edit]

I have commenced a tidy-up of the Bibliography section using cite templates. Capitalization and punctuation follow standard cataloguing rules in AACR2 and RDA, as much as Wikipedia templates allow it. ISBNs and other persistent identifiers, where available, are commented out, but still available for reference. This is a work in progress; feel free to continue. Sunwin1960 (talk) 22:49, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Stressed

[edit]

The article claims she wrote a piece (I don't know if it was a peer-reviewed research article or an opinion piece?) that "stressed the fact that...". The problem I have with this construction is the word "fact". It is almost certainly not a "fact". It is almost certainly an opinion. It should be corrected. It should either be "stressed the idea" or, perhaps "argued that (bibliographies perpetuated stereotypes)". Also I have a problem with the statement from a logical perspective: is there any biography that can't be said to "perpetuate stereotypes"? I doubt it. But perhaps this is original research and should be ignored...other than questioning the editor's interpretation of what she wrote. It would seem implausible that she made such a basic logical blunder.174.130.49.98 (talk) 20:31, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Past tense

[edit]

The article currently begins Patricia Fara was... (due to a small edit on 7th Oct 2023) but I cannot find any evidence of her passing. How is this kind of thing normally handled? Jsallcock (talk) 17:47, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]