Talk:Harriet Hall

Photos

User:Nightscream, about this; In my view the current photo (military uniform) is the best one we have, and if any would be deleted it would be the one with the smiley-face tee shirt. oy, aesthetics. Agree that three images would be better. We agree on removing the people standing by the blackboard, so that leaves one to remove. Again I would pick the tee shirt image, to remove. You chose the book-signing to remove.. but to me, that one is relevant to her role as author. Hm. Jytdog (talk) 18:38, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

The Infobox portrait should be one that most clearly shows the subject's face, and not of them in profile. Clothing is not a greater criterion here. As a compromise, I changed it to the one of her in the podium, which also shows her face clearly looking more in the direction of the camera, and which shows her in something other than a T-shirt. Nightscream (talk) 17:00, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

good enough. Jytdog (talk) 17:27, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Reverse of "smiley" t-shirt

A few recent edits have added pictures of and captions for the reverse of the "smiley" t-shirt. Harriet Hall has stated on the record that she's unhappy about the way that the shirt has been interpreted, and that she would have changed it if she had the chance to do it over. I'd ask that you respect her wishes on this matter, and not re-add the caption or image unless you significantly expand that section to include the relevant context. Bsdaemon (talk) 20:54, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Irreversible Damage section should go

I'm surprised to see a whole section that takes up about a third of the article about one book review on a controversial subject and its subsequent polemic on this page. Its also POV pushing, especially with the addition of the one quote. This is a "current affairs" thing that I don't think belong in a BLP. VdSV9•♫ 00:59, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for saying this. I have at least shortened it considerably and rolled it into another section, as it was far too long and clearly POV. (I shortened it more than it looks because I also added cite templates.) Let me know what you think. Crossroads ^-talk- 03:45, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Much improved. Thank you! I'm still of the position that such "current affairs" polemics shouldn't be in a BLP, but I'm willing to compromise. I mean, if this thing had been the thing that made her break out of SBM, then it might have been meaningful in her biography. This isn't. VdSV9•♫ 04:06, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

I'm conflicted because I can see that angle, but at the same time, it feels like it may be of enough interest to readers, including the criticism of the two who removed her review. I'll think more about it. If you have ways to make it seem less "polemic", please share. Crossroads ^-talk- 04:11, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

I appreciate the even-handed way this change was conducted. I think it is now much more acceptable to WP:BALASP. Allecher (talk) 19:46, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@Crossroads: You're right. It's fine.VdSV9•♫ 15:15, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Authority control

Authority control is somehow broken. I removed it for now, so check older versions and you'll see it points to some blank data. Authority control for other languages of this wiki works fine. And the link to wikidata is fine, too (Q193923). I tried adding qid=Q193923 to authority control, but it didn't change anything. I checked history, and it seems it was broken from the very beginning, 2016, when it was introduced instead of PERSONDATA. If you know how to fix it, please do. Akumiszcza (talk) 14:10, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

You may want to raise this issue at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) where many more people will see it. I am unsure of how to fix this.Dialectric (talk) 18:09, 15 January 2023 (UTC)