Talk:Ronald Ribman
Latest comment: 15 years ago by Avraham in topic Critical commentary section
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ronald Ribman article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | A fact from Ronald Ribman appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 4 August 2008, and was viewed approximately 340 times (disclaimer) (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
| 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: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Award winning edit
Sorry, i hit the wrong bottom before i could type in an edit summary. Not needed in the lead unless seriously note worthy. thank you --72.209.9.165 (talk) 00:24, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
- By "unless seriously noteworthy", are you referring to him or the award? --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 00:26, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
- To the award, sorry. Noble would be worthy of inclusion in the lead sentence. Maybe further into the article. It still is mentioned I believe. --72.209.9.165 (talk) 00:28, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
- If it were one award I might agree. But as he's won multiple awards, and in aggregate he can reasonably be considered "award winning." --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 00:37, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
- multiple?2 or 3?, which ones are we talking about? Really not needed in the lead, very peacocky. If you look at other bios, the bar is much higher, as it should be. Just stick to the basics in the lede and then flesh the rest out, especially in a short bio like this. --72.209.9.165 (talk) 00:42, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
- If it were one award I might agree. But as he's won multiple awards, and in aggregate he can reasonably be considered "award winning." --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 00:37, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
- To the award, sorry. Noble would be worthy of inclusion in the lead sentence. Maybe further into the article. It still is mentioned I believe. --72.209.9.165 (talk) 00:28, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Critical commentary section edit
Can this section be improved or removed. We have one random quote from who?? Thank you --72.209.9.165 (talk) 00:34, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
- No. But you can add to it if you wish. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 00:38, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
- The section just seems sort of aukward, what is it trying to say about the man? not really sure. --72.209.9.165 (talk) 00:44, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Quote isn't so random; it's from the American Repertory Theatre. The idea was to have one or two examples of what has been said about Ribman. Initial information had many more, but that would have been too peacocky. I felt one example was sufficient. If you could find more contemporary discussions of Ribman's work, that would be great. -- Avi (talk) 15:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)