Talk:William Childress

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Pulitzer Nominations?[edit]

not a Pulitzer nominee: This author is not listed among the nominees on the Pulitzer site, yet two nominations have repeatedly been added to his biography here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.86.104.174 (talk) 22:15, 27 March 2010 (UTC) The vast majority of Pulitzer Prize nominees are not listed on the Pulitzer site, for the simple reason that the site only lists the finalists and winners: it doesn't list those who didn't reach the "finals". But those people are still nominees--and their nominations are a great honor in themselves (even if they didn't "win").[reply]

The subject of this article is my father, and I can vouch (as can countless others!) for his two Pulitzer nominations: they were well-publicized and celebrated by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch at the time they occurred, and my father has cited them in every resume he's ever sent to every editor and publisher he's ever worked for, for decades. Unfortunately, the Post-Dispatch changed hands before I wrote this article, and it would now be very difficult (if not impossible) to obtain actual "documentary evidence" of nominations made a quarter century ago.

To take these accolades away from my father (as has twice been done here) is a disservice to the man: they are the crown jewels of his distinguished writing career, and he deserves recognition for them. Imagine if such honors had been awarded to you, and some anonymous guy kept deleting them!

I am adding them in again, because they are factually accurate. If they get deleted again, then 1) I will take it up on the Biography of Living Persons noticeboard; and 2) I respectfully ask that the person doing the deleting kindly have the decency to append their signature. Thank you. Chillowack (talk) 15:24, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Unfortunately, verifiability is one of the guidelines of Wikipedia. I have added a citation needed tag, and if these nominations cannot be documented, the statement will need to be deleted. Qassandra (talk) 19:10, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Neutrality Disputed[edit]

This article has been written and largely maintained by the subject's child (see above). The vast majority of claims have not been sourced in line with Wikipedia's verifiability requirements, and there is admitted original research (as in the discussion of "braille"). Qassandra (talk) 19:23, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]


I've made a few changes such as deleting the braille bit, modifying the opening statement to better reflect the evidence, and adding a citation, but most of this is still unsourced. Qassandra (talk) 00:29, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]