Talk:Stephenie Meyer

Latest comment: 3 months ago by Woahitsraj in topic LGBTQIA+ Rights Dispute


DYK nomination

edit
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk07:09, 8 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

  • Reviewed: Bill Hare
  • Comment: Became GA on 1/22/2020

Improved to Good Article status by Skyes(BYU) (talk). Self-nominated at 20:49, 22 January 2020 (UTC).Reply

  •  Article listed as GA 1/22/2020, not previously ITN or DYK, long enough, well cited, all 4 hooks stated in article and supported by inline citations and labeled as refs, no dispute tags, meets BLP criteria, neutrally written, not at AFD. QPQ completed. Hooks are all formatted well, are short enough, neutral, and focus on unusual facts. ALT0 wins my vote for the surprise effect! Good to go. Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 21:28, 25 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

LGBTQIA+ Rights Dispute

edit

Hello @FreeThinker37 , Could you please tell me where in the cited article for her LGBTQIA+ views Meyer " sent a message privately to Stewart containing a friendly message, along with a cease and desist notice". I couldn't find any evidence in the linked source which I why I removed the section that you added back. I also feel like the later half of the section that reads " The sudden homophobic retaliation of the statement was not surprising to many long time Stephenie Meyer detractors" is quite editorialized. I don't see how a 2009 article is relevant to a far more recent alleged homophobic incident (that still hasn't been proven) Woahitsraj (talk) 09:42, 1 August 2024 (UTC)Reply