Talk:Elaine Welteroth

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Tyler Laney. Peer reviewers: Mary T. Brown.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 20:34, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Additional sources to incorporate

1. http://www.avclub.com/article/users-guide-teen-vogue-which-suddenly-good-246652
2. http://www.adweek.com/galleycat/teen-vogue-is-starting-a-book-club/127015
3. http://www.glossy.co/instagram-effect/inside-the-instagram-with-teen-vogue-editor-elaine-welteroth
4. http://fashionista.com/2016/02/elaine-welteroth
5. http://rollingout.com/2016/09/05/elaine-welteroth-epitome-black-girl-magic-ygb/
6. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bethann-hardison-fashion-diversity-talk_us_55f72048e4b063ecbfa53551
7. http://www.eonline.com/news/517429/trendsetters-at-work-teen-vogue

In case others get to these before I do. Innisfree987 (talk) 06:10, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Bio details & sourcing

Hey Brill, thanks for your adds to this page! I just wanted to give you a head's up that I removed a couple based on my understanding of BLP policy (specifically re: primary sources and privacy)--wanted to let you know why I'd done so and also check and make sure with you that that seemed like the correct interpretation of policy! Thanks! Innisfree987 (talk) 18:04, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

@Innisfree987: I work on BLPs all the time. This is public information, a vital record, and is allowed. Welteroth is a highly visible, public figure and this information is freely available. Unless she specifically objects to this information, it should stay in. It is completely acceptable for a public figure. See any BLP for this. Also, if you are going to delete information, please at least leave template information so it can be machine read. -- Erika aka BrillLyle (talk) 18:06, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick reply BrillLyle. A couple follow-up questions.

1. I'm sorry, I didn't realize I'd affected the template. Can you tell me specifically what the issue is so I make sure to avoid it next time?
2. As best I understand it, policy specifically says that original research into things like birth records should not be used for BLPs. E.g. "Do not use public records that include personal details, such as date of birth, home value, traffic citations, vehicle registrations, and home or business addresses. Where primary-source material has been discussed by a reliable secondary source, it may be acceptable to rely on it to augment the secondary source, subject to the restrictions of this policy, no original research, and the other sourcing policies" (from WP:BLPPRIMARY). And: "With identity theft a serious ongoing concern, people increasingly regard their full names and dates of birth as private. Wikipedia includes full names and dates of birth that have been widely published by reliable sources, or by sources linked to the subject such that it may reasonably be inferred that the subject does not object" (from WP:BLPPRIVACY).

I'm not sure how to square these with your assertion the vital records alone, without additional ("widely published") secondary sources or even a source the subject had provided, satisfy policy for BLPs. Innisfree987 (talk) 18:34, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

@Innisfree987:

1. The template is part of the Infobox person template, the birth_date line. In hidden text, it's: {{birth date and age|YYYY|MM|DD}} for living people. For people who have died, use {{Birth date|YYYY|MM|DD}} It's important to use this template so it remains machine readable. Let me know if you have any questions. I love infoboxes, am obsessed with adding them.

2. I can't really spend a lot of time defending or debating Wiki:RULEZ -- I think that if you want to you can apply the Wiki:RULEZ in a very constrictive way, so that no content can go on Wikipedia at all. I try to strike a moderate place, and include publicly available vital records whenever possible to support birth dates and birth places. I would hesitate to use United States Public Records items because they are more current and invasive. But California and Texas birth records are of public record, and are available on FamilySearch, which is a legitimate source of citations for vital records, census records, etc. THAT SAID, if Welteroth doesn't want her information on the page, she can definitely communicate that and it will be deleted. However, her age is definitely written about, as it is notable that she has been promoted to the position she holds at such a young age. So that's another reason to add it, and have it be correct.

3. Again, I believe this information is okay, and if there are secondary sources, that would be great, but FamilySearch is definitely an accepted source. Again, as I said before, I do a lot of these BLPs and this usage is completely acceptable.

-- Best, Erika aka BrillLyle (talk) 18:44, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

BrillLyle, I suppose we're a bit at loggerheads then. I agree completely that her age has been written about widely and is certainly appropriate to include. It's the exact date and middle name that concern me as they are not widely published outside this original research AFAIK (if they are, let's just switch to those sources, of course!); and the policy, which I assume was developed by community consensus, seems pretty straightforward, rather than a matter of interpretation. As for RULEZ, I do hope you know I bring this up because I'm honestly trying to do the right thing; how WP handles privacy is quite a different matter from, I don't know, enforcing how many cricket matches you have to have played to rate a WP entry.

As to my template question, mainly I'm wondering about syntax to generate approximate age from a birth year alone rather than full DOB since as I say, my understanding had been that we should not use the exact date unless widely published (and I work almost entirely on BLPs myself, which is how I got acquainted with these policies). Or if exact date is unavailable, I suppose would be another case where this was needed. Oh, have just found my way to it, finally! Template:Birth_year_and_age in case it can help anyone else reading. Innisfree987 (talk) 19:27, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

@Innisfree987: Yeah, I wouldn't call it loggerheads. I would say I am speaking from a perspective of having done a lot of BLP pages -- almost all I do is BLP. And the consensus is the age, if there is a reliable source, is there. If someone is notable enough to have a page, if the birthdate and other information is available from a good citation, it's include. Other examples of editors: Anna Wintour, Grace Coddington, etc. And their birth dates aren't even cited. I would be more concerned that there needs to be a citation provided. At least in this case there's a citation available.

I understand your concern, but I tweeted at Welteroth, and I'm sure she will communicate if she is unhappy with anything on her page in some way or another. I understand your concern, but it's a little over-wrought. This person is notable, they are a very visible public figure with a large social following. She lists personal information in her social media and describes personal information in her writing. I think it's pretty clear that unless she says otherwise this information is okay. I use the comparison of other entries as a guideline. Including this info is typical, so it is okay. I don't know how else to explain this. I am not trying to impinge on her privacy in any way. I always try to reach out and am responsive to any concerns, fix mistakes, try to keep pages I've improved updated, etc. This is not a situation where I'm doing some sort of wrong here. I'm trying to make her entry as good as possible, and take this very seriously. So while I understand your concerns, I think it's too much. There are many things to be concerned about on BLP entries, but this is not, to me, one of them.

Yeah I was talking about leaving the template in. Not deleting all the template text. I thought that was implied.

I think you did a great job on this entry and encourage you to continue editing. Let me know if you have any questions. I'm happy to help. I also updated her Wikidata entry. Do you know about Wikidata? -- Erika aka BrillLyle (talk) 06:09, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Hey! I want to make changes on the Elaine Welteroth page, but I wanted approval beforehand. I want to include information on her career beginnings at Ebony magazine and more information on how her position at Teen Vogue should be considered a historical moment. What do you all think? Tyler Laney (talk) 22:12, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review by Mary T. Brown

I enjoyed reading this! It was great to learn more on Elaine, and you have made some great changes. Below i just have a few small notes that may help. Most are just grammar and formatting issues. I would also consider adding a picture, if possible. I looked at Anna Winter's page to see what an editor's page should include.

Lead: I feel like the lead should be restructured a bit. - in the beginning sentence, call her an American journalist and editor - mention next the year she became editor-in-chief of Teen Vogue, and how she's the youngest/second black woman. I feel that since these details are crucial to her notability, they should be mentioned rightt away instead of further down the lead. - then mention what changes she's brought to the magazine - lastly mention her other roles - Editor and editor-in-chief are not interchangeable, so I feel that her title in the lead should be editor-in-chief to better explain her title. These titles should also be lowercased.

Early Life: I would recommend adding years in the title, and mentioning when and where she was born.

Career - It might flow better if each of her stints at a magazine was separated by a paragraph, making it easier for the reader. - Did Welteroth bring Picardi and Suter to Teen Vogue? If not, I don't think they need to be included in a bio centered on her life.

Influence - you mentioned YouTube in the beginning, but it was not brought up again. I think this should be included in the influence section. - The quote from Slate should be a separate paragraph - the last sentence could be deleted, it was mentioned in the beginning of the paragraph - reference to the publication schedule, women featured in the magazine, and the shift in coverage should all be separate paragraphs to avoid an overload of information

Instagram - I would add how her Instagram is influential, because it seems not that important

Mary T. Brown (talk) 23:02, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Personal Life Details

There have been great edits to this page, but it is missing a section on Elaine Welteroth's personal life that is often seen on the Wikipedia pages for editors like Anna Wintour. She often speaks at varying professional conferences, not simply about Teen Vogue, but about her work-life balance and professional development in the creative field. Here are possible sources to be integrated into the article for anyone to use:

1. http://www.manrepeller.com/2017/02/elaine-welteroth-fiance-jonathan-singletary.html
2. https://www.girlswritenow.org/2017/03/meet-the-2017-girls-write-now-awards-honorees-and-emcee/
3. http://www.blackenterprise.com/event/women-of-power/5-key-career-takeaways/
4. http://www.blackenterprise.com/wealthforlife/4-takeaways-from-a-conversation-with-gayle-king-and-elaine-welteroth-how-millennials-are-transforming-media/

Tyler Laney (talk) 16:31, 11 May 2017 (UTC)