Talk:Alice Roberts/Archive 1

General style
I have tried to rewrite this article in the usual Wikipedia biography style, making it slightly more serious, deleting unnecessary detail and including relevant information regarding Alice Roberts' TV appearances, and taking in a few suggestions from comments above. It may be that other contributors can furnish more detail about her early life and career (which is rather sparse at present). Any suggestions are welcome, although I will try to pull information together in a cohesive, well-written professional style. Agendum (talk) 07:37, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
 * May I say that I have have not agreed with all of your edits; nevertheless, I think that a collaboration of editors, including yourself, have worked together to improved the article. Snowman (talk) 16:12, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Kind of you to say so. However, do we really need all this unnecessary material about the subject's personal life? I feel as if I'm participating in a weird competition as to who can discover the most irrelevant thing about Dr Roberts' private life! And a four word sentence – well, need I say any more? Meanwhile, you appear to object to me describing her as an anthropologist, which is clearly what she is, what she describes herself as, and what everyone knows her as..... I'm just puzzled! Cheers – Agendum (talk) 22:42, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I think that someone who was an anatomy demonstrator, and is now an anatomy lecturer, and who wants to become a professor of anatomy can safely be called an anatomist. One of her books has ".. an anatomists guide.." in the title. If you watched the third program of "The Incredible Human journey" about Asia, she said that she was an anatomist when she was in a museum in China. As far as I see it, anatomists also study embryology, evolution, physical anthropology, anthropology, comparative anatomy, histology, osteology, a number of basic medical sciences, a number of clinical sciences, and almost certainly a number of other sciences, but this is mainly to understand anatomy. I think it seems somewhat inconsistent to say in the lead that she was an anthropologist without mentioning anatomy at all. I agree, that she appears to have popularised aspects of anthropology recently on TV, so it would seem reasonable to add something about this to the introduction with an emphasis in anatomy and not instead of mentioning anatomy. To write it out in prose, it would probably be fair to say that she was an anatomist with interests in osteoarchaeology and anthropology. Snowman (talk) 14:32, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

File:Alice Roberts.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

 * I did not see this image, but I am aware of a previous attempt to put a copyrighted image in the infobox. Snowman (talk) 17:54, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Personal life section
Is it really necessary to detail the exact make, model and colour of someone's car (or van, in this case) in a biographical article? Does this meet Wikipedia's guidelines, with regard to privacy of the individual? I would like to suggest this be edited to something along the lines of "She owns a four-wheel-drive van, which has occasionally appeared on the TV series Coast, which she bought from Time Team (and University of Bristol) colleague, Mick Aston". EatYerGreens (talk) 14:47, 4 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I think that it's fine, and not a privacy issue. It helps to paint a picture of her character - she could, after all, probably afford a Porsche etc -- John (Daytona2 · Talk ·  Contribs) 19:00, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Is there a reference that gives the the type of her van? Snowman (talk) 16:17, 27 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I wanna echo EatYerGreens' sentiments with regards to the color of her hair. I don't think it's relevant, and the minutiae and obsessive detail is creepy, borderline stalking-ish. Madchine (talk) 19:42, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes I saw that and thought it was weird and scary. It's also sexist - you wouldn't comment on a picture of Terry Wogan that it was with a toupée. Dw69 (talk) 15:09, 22 October 2012 (UTC)


 * I have deleted the references to hair colour, both sexist and irrelevant. You could have, too. Monado (talk) 16:17, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Speaking of how the details of her personal life are here, why does the section say "She is not religious" when this appears to be one bit of information from an external website - by the same token, we could have put in that she sees herself as a technophobe (which is another piece of information on the same website)? ACEOREVIVED (talk) 19:19, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
 * It doesn't say "She is not religious", it says "She is a vegetarian and not religious". If you wish to alter it to e.g. "She is a vegetarian, a technophobe, and not religious", or perhaps "She has described herself as a vegetarian, a technophobe, and not religious", I see no reason to object. Qwfp (talk) 19:45, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Year of birth
The 1973 is sourced from a personal recollection from when her father was Lord mayor of Bristol, that she believes was in 1975. However, Edwin Roberts was in office from 1972 until his death on 27th March 1973) If the city of Bristol record is correct, presumably she was born earlier. Source: http://www.bristol.gov.uk/page/lord-mayor-bristol-history Contains pdf link. 218.103.114.186 (talk) 06:23, 20 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I knew Alice as a child. I can confirm that her year of birth was 1973. 92.28.196.75 (talk) 05:37, 15 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Alice has divulged her date of birth on twitter: https://twitter.com/DrAliceRoberts/status/336553304739950592 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quebeckre (talk • contribs) 22:18, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Name of husband
The name of her husband has been removed three times by an editor claiming to be husband, and each time this has been reverted or otherwise reinstated. The policy at Biographies of living persons states: "In a biography of a living person, an event such as marriage, divorce, legal separation, or when the intention to marry, divorce, legally separate is verifiable by its wide publication in several reliable sources, the name of the subject's intended spouse, spouse, or ex-spouse is not private, unless there has been a court seal on the disclosure of the name."

While the fact that she is married her husband's occupation appear to be verifiable from the references cited in the "personal life" section, her husband's name is not (and neither is the date of their marriage). It therefore seems entirely reasonable to abide by this editor's request for privacy unless several WP:reliable sources can be cited, so I have removed his name again. Qwfp (talk) 21:00, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree, the name (but not the year) is mentioned in the first reference, but no others and it isn't relevant to the subject's notability. — Snigbrook 21:15, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * She mentions it herself in an interview she gave to Bristol Evening Post in 2008. Seems reasonable to show it in the article if she actually draws attention to it herself in the press, surely? Jamesinderbyshire (talk) 12:15, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd say her husband's name is not "relevant to a reader's complete understanding of the subject", so following WP:BLPNAME should not be in the article unless multiple sources give the name: "The presumption in favor of privacy is strong in the case of family members [... who are] otherwise low-profile persons." Rwendland (talk) 22:55, 5 November 2011 (UTC)


 * The husband's name has been inserted again by an anonymous editor, and so I have removed it again. LynwoodF (talk) 22:29, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Photo
Watching The Incredible Human Journey, she appears to have had a fairly dramatic makeover recently. It would be useful to have a more recent photo showing her current appearance. --80.176.142.11 (talk) 21:34, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

I Agree that photo is disgusting please take it off. She is much better looking with makeup. --24.243.28.202 (talk) 06:04, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * While there is no harm in asking for a more recent photograph, this is not a good reason to remove the existing one. "I don't like it" is even less of a good reason. Removal of image duly reverted. Thryduulf (talk) 08:03, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Agreed with the last comment. - Agendum (talk) 16:00, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Absolutely agree as well. Paste  Let’s have a chat. 16:16, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * It is a spectacularly unflattering photo and really doesn't look like her at all. It's nothing to do with the age of the photograph, image, makeup, or lack of it, it's simply a poor likeness due to a catching an odd expression under bad lighting (looks like it was taken indoors with too much flash and the wrong colour temperature). It is quite perverse to use this photo when there are so many better ones available.Spiridens (talk) 13:19, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Still no current photo? While a pic from early 2007 is obviously better than no pic at all, AR seems to have moved on from the hippy geek look she had back then and has glammed herself up considerably during the last couple of years. She now looks completely different. --Ef80 (talk) 19:01, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually I don't think she looks any different at all, but it's still a very bad photograph.Spiridens (talk) 13:19, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
 * She must have a large number of acquaintances (family, friends, colleagues, students) so maybe one of those would like to take a better photo (with her permission of course) and upload it. It can be difficult to avoid copyright issues otherwise, which is presumably why the existing duff pic is still here. --Ef80 (talk) 21:31, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The image uploaded by Maybesometime is a huge improvement. --Ef80 (talk) 16:28, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Watching Brian Cox: Space, Time & Videotape tonight, she is now looking incredibly glamorous. The contrast with the 2007 picture is amazing, and even the 2010 pic in the infobox is looking pretty dated. Presumably she's decided to make more of an effort having hit 40, and it seems to be working. --Ef80 (talk) 21:49, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Have to agree. Of course she benefits, just like cutesy Brian, from having no beard. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:15, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I just cropped the infobox photo more tightly to a headshot (it was already cropped from File:West Hanney, Oxfordshire, England -archaeology rally-11Sept2010.jpg). Qwfp (talk) 22:43, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Personally I think she looks pretty gorgeous in that one! Martinevans123 (talk) 22:47, 9 November 2014 (UTC)


 * The aspect ratio now looks wrong to me. --Ef80 (talk) 01:17, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Try a cache WP:BYPASS. Qwfp (talk) 07:32, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Anthropologist
Her website states she is, she was a Fellow in the subject so it seems reasonable to keep the description? Paste Let’s have a chat. 21:29, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Agree. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:30, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
 * So do I. LynwoodF (talk) 09:14, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Junior school
Is the name of the junior school she attended appropriate for this article, and if so what would be a suitable source? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:18, 13 November 2014 (UTC)


 * As the editor who added the information, I'd like to thank you for creating this section.


 * My contention is that the fact Alice attended a C-of-E primary school is relevant in the context of her outspoken atheism in adulthood and public comments on the teaching of religion in schools. It also gives biographical context to her upbringing in an affluent Bristolian village-suburb, attending two nominally Anglican schools barely half a mile apart.


 * I also contend that Friends Reunited is an acceptable source. The page I referenced was created by Alice herself. Wikipedia considers that living persons are acceptable authorities on their own lives. Alice's Twitter account and personal web page are given as references in other footnotes. In that context, I think that her Friends Reunited account is a valid source of information on her educational background.


 * 94.7.114.43 (talk) 14:26, 13 November 2014 (UTC)


 * I don't think "Friends Reunited" is a problematic source, is it? Surely it's better than the many pay-wall sites that are currently used as sources at Wikipedia. At least you dont have to pay! But I'd be surpised if no one has asked about it before now. Probbaly worth checking the archives at WP:RSN?
 * As regards the notability or usefuless of her junior school education, I'm sure she's not the first person to have attended a C-of-E junior shool and later become an "outspoken atheist". Perhaps it's even seen as a requirement! But I see that the sources that discuss her atheist sentiments generally refer only to her secondary education (which partly explains, I guess, why you are driven to the single Friends Reunited source for her junior school). Martinevans123 (talk) 17:58, 13 November 2014 (UTC)


 * There was some suggestion on User talk:90.214.223.39 that Friends Reunited isn't an acceptable source: I'd welcome input from other editors on the matter. I couldn't find a reference at WP:RSN, but I'm not sure I'm searching correctly.


 * Regarding notability, relevance and novelty are not the same thing! Many people are born in Bristol, for example, but that doesn't mean that Alice's place of birth is not relevant to her biography.


 * 90.220.29.160 (talk) 11:23, 14 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Yes, I wasn’t sure that I was searching successfully, either. Re notability, my point was really that unless we can find WP:RS that suggest her C-of-E primary school was relevant or even “ironic”, with regard to her adult views, we are indulging in WP:OR or WP:POINT. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:59, 14 November 2014 (UTC)


 * I can't see that WP:POINT applies at all here. To quote, "just because someone is making a point does not mean that they are disrupting Wikipedia to illustrate that point."


 * Let me be clear that I'm not suggesting that any causal link exists between Alice's C-of-E education and her adult atheism, only that one is interesting (and therefore worthy of inclusion) in the light of the other, particularly given her public stance on religion in schools. See this published interview, for example, where Alice discusses her Anglican upbringing as background to her atheism:


 * https://newhumanist.org.uk/articles/2882/qa-alice-roberts


 * There's no suggestion that one led directly to the other, but clearly a discussion of one is appropriate in terms of the context it gives to the other.


 * 90.222.88.108 (talk) 09:20, 15 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Well, I certainly would not object to including her junior school. If only we had an easier source. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:20, 15 November 2014 (UTC)


 * It should be borne in mind that most English CofE primary schools are not ostentatiously evangelical or even religious. My father was head teacher of one for ten years, and he was an agnostic. It usually just means that the local vicar sits on the board of governors. --Ef80 (talk) 19:36, 13 December 2014 (UTC)


 * I'm glad to see that User:Rodw has now added a better source. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:11, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I had changed from the Friends Reunited reference to the Bristol Post one |with this edit a year ago, however this |was reverted with the edit summary "Source given doesn't support article. Reference reverted, "better source needed" tag added." I have only come back to the article becuase it appears on the WikiProject Bristol cleanup list.&mdash; Rod talk 16:57, 20 September 2016 (UTC)


 * It's not a better source! The Bristol Post article makes no specific mention of Alice's primary school, and we already have references to her secondary school being in Westbury. 2A02:C7D:8B5:E700:5C30:FF8F:5453:7701 (talk) 19:08, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Two of the links there now seem to be dead. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:24, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Alice Roberts. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.radiotimesbacknumbers.com/Category/Radio+Times--3aRT+1980-89--3aRT+1988/12643/Review.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 15:06, 29 March 2016 (UTC)


 * The radiotimesbacknumbers.com link is now dead. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:40, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Vegetarian
There is a reliable source to verify that she is a vegetarian. I think that this is an important aspect of her personal life and well worth mentioning. Snowman (talk) 14:40, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm sure I saw her eating raindeer on telly. Maybe she was just being polite. And Introducing... A Leg (talk) 17:33, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * It was a vegetarian option ;-) Agendum (talk) 17:59, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * She said she was vegetarian in the radio interview that is indicated by the in-line reference and mentioned the filming trip in Russia, and she was extremely negative about the Reindeer meat, and I think that she did not eat any of it. Snowman (talk) 12:27, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

She is not a true vegetarian, she is seen eating smoked salmon on Sunday Brunch Channel 4 UK at 10:30 on 04/10/15
 * She may also be partial to a bit of venison. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:38, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I saw her in Egham Sainsbury's scoffing handfuls of raw offal straight from the packet. Definitely not a veggie. --OhNoPeedyPeebles (talk) 20:03, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Really? Did you manage to take an incriminating picture, perhaps? Martinevans123 (talk) 20:49, 14 April 2018 (UTC) .... except Egham doesn't have a Sainsbury's, only that frightfully dreary Waitrose??