Talk:Robert Joseph Greene

Contested deletion

This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because... Robert Joseph Greene has made significant in roads in reducing homophobia via his work by writing fiction pieces from various cultural societies around the world.

This is "WORTHY OF NOTICE" because Mr. Greene and his writings have caught the attention of the general public. Some cultures are now addressing issues of homophobia and using Mr. Greene's works to combat homophobia in their respective cultures. Mr. Greene's work is creating gay awareness in cultures who erroneously believe that LGBT people do not exist (ex Persia).

Here is a perfect example of this but the problem in dealing with Wiki guidelines and moving the main "worthy of notice" criteria is that many sites (for capacity purposes) shorten their stories or delete them. Here is an example of a story that I chose not to list as a reference because of this:

http://chicago.gopride.com/news/worldfeed.cfm?golink=FABF3741E07349EDD36DB2C30B844737O43637

There was another article from the Vancouver Sun dated August 4, 2012 that was posted online but is now not available which sites Mr. Greene's dedication through to the LGBT community but again the story was taken down due to capacity issues by that particular website.

I showed two cases of why Mr. Greene is "worthy of notice" in regards to his efforts in creating LGBT awareness through his works.

The 1st case was the Russian Protest piece that was in the Georgia Straight Magazine (which is listed as a reputable source under Wikipedia's guidelines http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Georgia_Straight). In this article, Greene has donated the rights of his story "The Blue Door" to the people of Russia to educate them about gay awareness in their culture"

The 2nd case, was the address of the Judea story and it's cultural awareness of gay issues in the old testament. The source I quote is from PrideSource however there was a better story that is now "offline" so I can't quote it. Why is is of "Worthy Notice" is that it had created dialog in cultures. Again, Steven Greenberg is a wikipedia person of interest and a reputable and reliable source

I think that removing Mr. Greene shows a disregard for people trying to make a difference in the LGBT Community. Mr. Greene has donated books for reading groups, volunteered and has done a lot of public speaking on LGBT issues. So, if there was something to suggest that I "add" to bolster this article, please let me know.

Mr. Greene is listed in the ABC World of who's who of Canadian Authors.

I did read your guideline measures and felt that Mr. Greene and my article deserved merit and listing on Wikipedia.

What I didn't add but is also "worthy of notice" is that Mr. Greene has "professional status" with the Canadian Author's Association.

For the record, it isn't a requirement of Wikipedia that our sources be available online. If you have the title and publication date of that Vancouver Sun article and the "better story" from Pride Source, then they're still perfectly valid citations even without weblinks. And that chicago.gopride.com article is perfectly acceptable too — while we certainly try to provide convenience links to web copies of the reference whenever possible, it's not a requirement. As long as we provide the proper citation data (title of article, name and date of publication, ISBN number for a book, etc.) we can reference stuff to print-only content.

I would suggest, however, that you avoid the allegations of political bias. While it's true that not every Wikipedia editor in the entire world is necessarily LGBT-friendly, Wikipedia as a whole does not have any institutional bias against LGBT topics — I, for instance, am an openly gay Wikipedia administrator who's quite actively involved in LGBT topics via Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBT Studies and in fact recently launched a dedicated workgroup within that project specifically for LGBT Canadian topics. So there are plenty of people around who'd be happy to help out, trust me. Bearcat (talk) 23:58, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Contested deletion

I'm surprised that someone has asked that this be deleted. The author is clearly a leader in addressing bias against the LGBT community and has had a career of influential work. I hate to cry 'wolf', but the attempt to entirely DELETE this bio strikes me as potentially being a political backlash against the authors political position. This is a moderate, middle-of-the-road bio that is well referenced, and describes an author who has had international influence in an important, and particularly topical and polarizing area. Other than a disagreement with the subjects political views, what could anyone be protesting about this bio?? I disagree with the attempt to delete this page. Wikipedia is about sharing information, not suppressing it.

Marc.Colbeck (talk) 08:04, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Contested deletion

This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because it does not meet the criteria need for "speedy deletion" under wikipedia guidelines. I will disclose that I am the subject in question in this article. I did make minor changes because a book title was missing from the entry. However, I did not write this article.

I do not think it is biased of me to site an error in judgement for the removal of this article. I don’t think the person that nominated this article for “ Criteria for speedy deletion”

is following Wikipedia’s guidelines. Because the guideline states that

“it could be improved, reduced to a stub, merged or redirected elsewhere”

and I feel that within those guidelines something can be done to keep this article intact.

I feel there is enough information there to meet the criteria or re-direct the article to one of the designations mentioned above.

Furthermore, I concur with the person that create this article and is defending his source. I want to point out that under Criteria for speedy deletion guidelines A7:

“It is irrelevant whether the claim of notability within the article is not sufficient for the notability guidelines. If the claim is credible, the A7 tag can not be applied. Often what seems non-notable to a new page patroller is shown to be notable in a deletion discussion.”

I feel the source sites are notable and therefore this was flagged in haste. I will therefore request for the removal of the “Criteria for speedy deletion tag” for this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Desaderal (talk • contribs) 09:24, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Citation Needed

This prompted the Canadian Library Association to reiterate their policy towards LGBT inclusiveness that would apply to "freedom of expression".[citation needed] is on page two of ^ Christofle, Robert (July 1, 2012). "Are Librarians Fearful of Giving Their Opinion Publicly?". Feliciter via Highbeam. Retrieved April 8, 2013. So, I don't know how to site this. Can someone tell me what I should do? This article isn't online but I do have a copy of it.

I'll handle the citation, but it would be nice to know exactly what the article says, since the sentence as written is a little clunky ("would apply"). Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 22:29, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

first paragraph

Someone has removed that I am the cousin to Carmen McRae. I lived with her off and on for many years while I went to university. I have proof but do I necessarily have to post my private information for it to be made valid? I have my paystubs from employment with her address on it. I have an autographed photo that says "To Rob Love Your Cousin Carmen McRae". Is there a way I can upload these for verification but for them not to be made public?

Wikipedia requires published sources such as newspaper articles. If no such sources connect you to McRae, that detail apparently isn't all that significant, and we should not mention it at Wikipedia either. Basically, even if you posted your private information, we still should not mention it without reliable third-party sources. Huon (talk) 10:15, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

It's also trivia. Best omitted. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 13:43, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Two notes

1. Does the paragraph about things Greene's publisher has done belong in a BLP?

2. The image that accompanies that paragraph includes an image of the book cover which is likely copyrighted, and its use in a BLP would not meet fair use guidelines.

I could be wrong, of course. --| Uncle Milty | talk | 00:23, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

The article image indeed doesn't belong here; I've removed it. However, the only paragraph I can find in the article which appears to fit your first question is indeed appropriate, because it's a finding that's specifically about Greene and his work and not just random unrelated trivia about the company. Bearcat (talk) 00:39, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

It's the one that begins "In 2012, Greene's publisher found that librarians would not review...". Of course, I cannot read the ref due to the paywall, so maybe Greene's own actions are mentioned in there. --| Uncle Milty | talk | 00:54, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Okay, yeah, that's the one I was talking about too. Because the publisher's finding does pertain specifically to Greene's work and its public reception, it is acceptable to note here regardless of what actions Greene personally did or didn't undertake during the research process. Bearcat (talk) 01:00, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Ok, cool. Thanks. --| Uncle Milty | talk | 01:10, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

citation cached

What do you do when a reference is nolonger available but you've found the citation cashed? I am referring to reference#6 story carnivores. Here is the cashed version of the link. http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:U34mckk4md8J:storycarnivores.com/2013/03/09/lambda-literary-finalists-for-best-lgbt-young-adult-novels/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca&client=firefox-a Does this help?Tews (talk) 09:35, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

In this particular case, don't do anything — Story Carnivores wasn't an acceptable reliable source for Wikipedia's purposes in the first place (it's the personal blog of two individual writers, which thus fails WP:USERG), so what we need is a better source rather than a recache of the existing one. Bearcat (talk) 18:24, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Here is a new link: http://en.paperblog.com/lambda-literary-finalists-for-best-lgbt-young-adult-novels-461913/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.92.186.107 (talk) 00:56, 19 February 2015 (UTC)