| 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. |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Notability
editI am in an MA program in Rhetoric and Writing and can safely say that Peter Elbow is one of the most respected scholars within writing pedagogy and composition studies. I'm going to remove the notability tag from the article; perhaps when the semester is finally (finally!) over, I'll try to give the article a good edit. --Roman à clef 12:15, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
- This article is almost nothing but puffery; it needs to be cut by about 80%. Languagehat (talk) 15:19, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Re. Cut & Paste Technique
editThe Cut and Paste Technique section was removed and this was not meant to offend the original person who inserted it. My class is doing a project and part of that project involves editing a Wikipedia page-we picked Peter Elbow. Slightly overwhelmed with where and how to begin, we e-mailed Peter Elbow and asked for any bit of information he has to offer. He, very graciously, provided us with an abundance of information. Part of his reply e-mail involved him instructing us to remove the cut and paste technique section because it is not a major focus of his-he wanted us to focus more attention to the free writing section and that is what we did. Thank you for understanding. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amy acaba (talk • contribs) 21:49, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
Fat Draft
editLooks like there may be some unacknowledged redundancies between old and new sections of the article; one pair that stands out as worth combining is "The Bartholomae / Elbow Debate" and "Being a Writer vs. Being an Academic": the latter article was a revised-for-print version of Elbow's part in the official discussion at CCCC. I'm sure there are other instances in the article as it stands in which new material could be usefully integrated with old material, and the overall article made more concise. --Benmiller314 (talk) 04:38, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
Original research?
editThere is a lot of sourcing to primary sources here, but besides that... it looks like some of the article uses an (unpublished?) email interview between Elbow and students as a reference. I would appreciate someone else take a look at this. I am inclined to remove the material as original research. --Ds13 (talk) 17:26, 10 February 2012 (UTC)