Talk:Bette Korber

Message
I'm taking a Wikipedia Fellows class at Wiki Ed and I've been working on women in science articles. I see that a recent editor removed the husband and children and said these were not accepted as part of a WP article but I have seen them frequently on Women in Science and other biographical articles. Is the consensus not to put in these data? I find them of interest and would like them to be available in articles but if that's just not done, I will refrain from adding them.LLMHoopes (talk) 11:03, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Query about including husband and number of children
On my talk page, I've been having an interesting discussion about whether or not it's appropriate to include Bette Korber's husband and the number of children she has. My feeling is that since many people seem to believe women who have children cannot do top flight science, it's important information for readers. But I am interested to know what arguments there are against using it, besides that the article is mostly focused on the science achievements.LLMHoopes (talk) 19:08, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
 * my two cents, on a living person, I would probably not include the information unless it was relevant to her career. You make an argument for why it would be relevant. If I included it, I would probably not give names, and am glad to see you omitted the children's names. You can always list them in an informational comment, using . That way, the data is there for incorporation at a later time. I often do the comment with full birth information on living people, as their identifying information must be protected from identity thieves, etc. SusunW (talk) 16:19, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Added information on vaccine development and origin of HIV
=Responding to a suggestion from Ian Pigott, I have expanded this article while it's waiting to be evaluated as a possible good article. I have added more material on the vaccine development strategies created by Korber and also on her role in the debate about the date of origin of HIV virus in Africa.LLMHoopes (talk) 23:24, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Initial Response to First Review for Good Article Status
Thank you for considering this article for Good Article status. I agree with your suggestions/comments and have made changes to respond to them unless it's not possible. In some cases, the source website I was using had no date of origin on it so I could not add a date. I believe those are the only suggestions I did not follow in the current revision. I'm ready to consider any more suggestions that you have, Ceranthor.LLMHoopes (talk) 17:12, 10 November 2018 (UTC)