Talk:Ruth Norman

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Ruth Norman/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Crisco 1492 (talk · contribs) 03:58, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

• I'll take this! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:58, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Checklist

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
	1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
	2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Fine
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Fine
	2c. it contains no original research.	Fine
	3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Fine
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Fine
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Fine
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Per definition
	6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	See below
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	Pending

Comments

1

• "In her early to mid-teen years, she labored as a fruit packer and a maid, giving most of her income to her father, who she later described as abusive." - A lot of clauses. Could you split this?
  • Sure, split. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:14, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
• Unarius' or Unarian?
  • Not sure which is best, but I've standardized them. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:14, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
• Diana Tumminia - What's she do?
  • I'm not too sure what you're looking for here, I noted that she published a study of the group in 2005 though. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:14, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
• Using this talent - Typing as a talent? Really?
  • Hmm, I was trying not to repeat "skill", rephrased. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:14, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
• "Seeking to popularize his channeling, in 1954, Ernest and Ruth an organization," - Missing a word.
  • Ahh, good catch. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:14, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
• Ioshanna... does this have a meaning?
  • Possibly, but not that I've noticed in the sources. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:14, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
• Michiel - link to Michael (archangel), assuming they're the same? Same with Raphael (archangel). Perhaps a link to archangel too.
  • I presume they're the same, or similar enough to justify a link. I'm sure Unarius has some novel perspectives on these angels. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:14, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
• "property near Jamul, California, to serve as a landing site for the Space Brothers." - You didn't explain who the Space Brothers are yet
  • Good catch, moved the explanation. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:14, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
• "six core myths" - Myths or beliefs?
  • There more or less the same in terms of the study of religion, but I rephrased for clarity. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:14, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
• "Weber's concept of charismatic leadership." - Who?
  • Explained, and it turns out we have an article on the concept too. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:14, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
• Perhaps merge "last years" and 80s under one heading
  • Sure, that works. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:14, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
• I did a copyedit, be sure to double check.
  • Looks good, only one error introduced. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:14, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
• Fix disambiguation needed tag. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:39, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Hadn't realized that there were two people named James R. Lewis with articles, wow. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:14, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

2

• I'm a bit concerned about the heavy reliance (overwhelming majority of footnotes) on Tumminia as a reference. It seems that a broader-based reference set would be preferable.--Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 20:49, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
  • That would be a good idea for the peer review. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:53, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

6

• Any images at all possible? Even fair-use ones of her? Image of Tesla (like this)? Image of the Unarius Academy of Science?
  • Yeah, I had been meaning to add one of Ruth in, hadn't gotten around to it though. Just uploaded File:Ernest and Ruth Norman.jpg. Tesla's a good idea. I should check if there are any Wikipedians in the area that could get a pic of their headquarters. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:14, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
• AGF on offline sources.

In the introductory paragraph it is stated that Norman was a native of California, but in the "Early Life and Marriage" paragraph it states that she was born in Indiana. This seems contradictory. ;Lawrence Ames (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.124.92.254 (talk) 16:11, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Further discussion

• On hold for a week. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:34, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
• Looks peachy, passing. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:16, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Urantian or Unarian?

The sentence "Kirkpatrick and Tumminia state that the Urantian canon appears to be impenetrable..." had the following astute comment: <Urantian or Unarian? Urantian is a different kettle of fish>. As Urantia is a new religious movement as well, the source might conceivably have mentioned it (in which case the sentence would be irrelevant), but a quick check shows Unarius was meant after all. Lusanaherandraton (talk) 23:32, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, thanks for doing that. I screwed that up, I have written about the Urantian canon in the past as well, so I really should have caught that! Mark Arsten (talk) 23:36, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Categorization

Should she be placed in Category:People from San Diego, California, Category:People from Pasadena, California, Category:People from Indianapolis, Indiana and Category:New Age writers (did she write any books herself?).(User:Mercurywoodrose)50.193.19.66 (talk) 18:51, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

I would answer yes to all those questions. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 18:55, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

I concur +1 for the reversal of the Prophecy and Therapy section large removal

Hi, +1 I agree with the person that undid (undo'ed) the large edit where an anonymous person removed a large paragraph about Norman betting $1000 that the Earth would be visited by aliens within a certain year. There were good cite/ref's. Glad that this edit occurred and undid the large removal! I was going to copy paste the removed text to the Talk page at least for posterity.. --Peter aka Vid2vid (talk) 02:08, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

oops here is the "diff" link.. --Peter aka Vid2vid (talk) 02:12, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

"The couple discussed numerous details about their past lives"

I am very uncomfortable with the following being stated in wikivoice: "The couple discussed numerous details about their past lives.... The existence of past lives is a fringe belief and I think something like "alleged past lives" is more appropriate. Courtesy ping Mark Arsten. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 19:17, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Fair enough. That wasn't my intention, of course. Mark Arsten (talk) 23:03, 20 August 2020 (UTC)