User talk:Shazaamemt
Hi. Sorry to edit in a way that offends you, but you mention Cameron without first explaining who he was. I agree that a person`s education should be part of his bio, but merely to define it in negative terms without stating what qualifications he or she has actually achieved is not sufficient.andycjp (talk) 12:23, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Fair enough, I listed what qualifications he has achieved in the field of education. He is a graduate of High School, and himself admits no other education either in the realm of religion or science.
I cannot help the fact that you see this fact as 'negative terms' but it is fact. Unbiased, simple fact. See it as positive or negative as you please.
Welcome
[edit]Welcome!
Hello, Shazaamemt, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Tutorial
- How to edit a page and How to develop articles
- How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Abrazame (talk) 13:22, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
Handling of education in biographies
[edit]I noticed your post on the Barack Obama talk page. I emphasize that it might improve your chances of being responded to if you sign your posts by typing four tildes in a row at the very end. A tilde is the ~ symbol.
My editorial judgment is that the information is best presented in biographies as we generally do present it, in Early life sections (or as it occurs, as some people receive formal education later in life). For an individual who intends to influence others with their opinions and positions (as distinguished from run-of-the-mill celebrities), I would argue that their education (including whatever extracurricular experiences they may report as profound influences) would be relevant to their Wikipedia bio. Receiving a college degree does not ensure the validity or intelligence of a person's position, but it suggests that they have at one time in their life, for several years, been challenged to consider a broader spectrum of knowledge and ideas than might otherwise occur to them. Still, it's not the only way to gain wisdom or insight, and it doesn't necessarily equate to experience; by segregating formal scholastic experience from the rest of their formative life experiences, I think many editors will feel it puts too fine a point on the information. If you'd like to get the opinion of other editors on your suggestion as a broad policy, you might bring it up at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography or some other such discussion forum here at Wiki. You might inquire if there was support to develop an education infobox that could be added to bios.
I recommend that you modify articles to textually insert the information you feel they lack, along with the WP:Reliable source you are using as your reference, rather than creating headed sections limited to their educational experience. What I mean by this is, to use an example drawn from your recent edits, if you want to make the point that Jon Stewart received a B.S. degree, since it already mentions that he majored in Psychology at William and Mary, you would add the specific degree he received to the part that already discusses his graduation. So you might change the article's sentence "After graduating from William and Mary in 1984, Stewart held numerous jobs..." to "After graduating from William and Mary in 1984 with a B.S. degree in Psychology, Stewart held numerous jobs..." You could wikilink the degree (as Bachelor of Science|B.S.) and you would reference the fact, perhaps with this.
This avoids some of the redundancy your edit there presents. Another problem with that edit is that your sentences are written in bullet-point style despite the fact that you're writing article text. A third problem I have with that edit is that even if it were appropriate to have its own heading, it would be a subhead (as in "Early work"), and it seems more appropriate for Personal background than Professional background. (Undergraduate work, for someone who does not pursue that field as a vocation, is clearly a personal and not a professional detail, as one is not a professional in college and that is not a profession they chose. Postgraduate schooling in one's field arguably would be part of their professional background, particularly as many people apprentice or work in their field as they pursue a postgraduate degree, another reason this is best handled in the text where most appropriate.) For instances where a person has not had formal education in their purported field of expertise, as it seems with Comfort, it's likely that some reliable source has already published the fact (or he may have acknowledged this himself), and you would note that in a simple sentence somewhere in the text and include your reference. Regards, Abrazame (talk) 13:23, 5 November 2009 (UTC)