Talk:Emma Bunton

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:37, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Emma Bunton at Heart Live Christmas 2016.jpg

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:53, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Emma Bunton at Heart Live Christmas 2016.jpg

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:53, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Emma Bunton Dublin 2004.jpg

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:37, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Emma Bunton at G.A.Y.jpg

Should "author" be included in the lead sentence?
First,, no one is claiming that Emma Bunton is not an author, nor is anyone claiming that "So you're not an author unless you've written more than one book". The issue here is whether being an author (writing one book) is what she is notable for as far as the general reader is concerned. Clearly and I think that being an author is secondary to her primary notability as a Spice Girl and TV/radio/media personality. Per MOS:ROLEBIO: "The lead sentence should describe the person as they are commonly described by reliable sources." and "However, avoid overloading the lead paragraph with various and sundry roles; instead, emphasize what made the person notable."

The fact that there are many poorly written Wikipedia articles out there is not an argument. Look at well-written articles like Hillary Clinton (has achieved featured article status). Clinton has authored many books (see Bibliography of Hillary Clinton), yet her being an author is not mentioned at all in the lead, because her notability is primarily from her political career, and her being an author is secondary to all of that. The lead is supposed to summarise what the subject is notable for, not list every single job/career/role/position they've ever had in their life. Bennv123 (talk) 02:25, 12 December 2023 (UTC)


 * You realize you're cherry picking and using circular logic? So because some articles on here don't include the occupation of author but some do therefore she shouldn't have the designation of being an author? 70.50.103.213 (talk) 02:49, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Also one of Clinton's occupations is author and it is listed... 70.50.103.213 (talk) 02:51, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Of course that is not what I'm saying. Please stop putting words in my mouth. I only brought up the example of Clinton to show you that this does indeed happen on Wikipedia, because you said other Wikipedia articles had "author" listed as a reason for why it should be listed here. And I'm talking about removing the descriptor of "author" from the lead sentence. Not the infobox. Bennv123 (talk) 02:58, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
 * You said that Clinton isn't listed as an author which she is and when you undid my edit you undid her listed occupation as author in the infobox as well so you are the one being dishonest here. 70.50.103.213 (talk) 03:03, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
 * You are being pedantic. That would be like me accusing you of vandalism because your edits also happened to repeatedly remove a reference by accident . But I am not going to make pedantic attacks like that because it was clearly not the intention of your edits. Bennv123 (talk) 03:11, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
 * For the last time: my argument for removing "author" from the lead sentence is NOT because I don't think Emma Bunton is an author, NEITHER does it have anything to do with the Hillary Clinton article not including "author" in the lead sentence. My actual argument for removing the "author" descriptor in the lead sentence is that I don't think it is integral to her primary notability per MOS:ROLEBIO. Looking at recent articles about Emma Bunton such as and, and she is described as a "former Spice Girl" and a "singer turned radio presenter"; those roles seem to be what she is primarily notable for. Bennv123 (talk) 03:14, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm very sceptical that Bunton is, in any meaningful way, "an author". I think it's probably more of a marketing ploy to sell more books because she's a well-known name. Even the publisher makes it clear it's a book by her with a team of UK and US experts. She is really not known as an author. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:27, 12 December 2023 (UTC)