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 sourcedmust 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 within the scope of WikiProject Women scientists, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in science on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women scientistsWikipedia:WikiProject Women scientistsTemplate:WikiProject Women scientistsWomen scientists articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computer science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Computer science related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Computer scienceWikipedia:WikiProject Computer scienceTemplate:WikiProject Computer scienceComputer science articles
This article was created or improved as part of the Women in Red project. The editor(s) involved may be new; please assume good faith regarding their contributions before making changes.Women in RedWikipedia:WikiProject Women in RedTemplate:WikiProject Women in RedWomen in Red articles
My evaluation: The article on Dr. Marsha Rhea Williams was overall a well formatted, easy to understand article. There was nothing distracting about the article although I'd hope there was a visual aid. There is however a visual reference. From what I observed the information that was reported because it was a biography was up to date. I would liked to have seen a portion of the article about her advocacy for greater minorities in STEM fields and a list of all affiliated organizations and publications. This article overall was very neutral. There were no biases or claims that I could identify. The author was simply reporting the facts. The link to the reference material and citation links are functional. One of the sources was a news article/ journal that holds some biases, and the article doesn't draw from the biases but presents the facts. The opinions are backed with facts however in the original article. The sources were of a diverse set. I may be biased in my own views but I love that the article highlighted her accomplishments. This is a C-Class wikipedia article and on the scale of low importance. There isn't much conversation in the talk page, just a few minor corrections to things like dates. Overall I would say this article was well-written and free of biases. It was a great article.Tamia1222 (talk) 18:39, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
Is there any other relevant family history, children or a spouse?Tamia1222 (talk) 18:39, 24 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
