Talk:Faith Popcorn/Archives/2015

Request Review of Revision of Entry

 * The request below has been resolved by an editor who reviewed the suggested changes and made them. ThanksBC1278 (talk) 21:11, 30 June 2015 (UTC)BC1278

Hi to any editors watching this page. For a while, I've been working on a new draft for this article that aims to bring the page better in line with guidelines, improve sourcing and bring the article up to date. In particular, seeking to use reliable sources to add information about the subject and make this an informative article for readers. To fully disclose, I am working for Faith Popcorn’s company as a consultant. Due to this WP:COI, I will steer clear of making any direct edits, preferring instead to propose draft material for others to review and move live if it looks good. I have endeavored to abide by all policies involving notability, neutrality WP:NPOV, reliable sourcing and no promotional/PR tone.

My draft can be found in my userspace, here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BC1278/sandbox#Career So, why a new draft? There are a few reasons, the largest being that there is meager sourcing for the article, no sourcing at all for several sections, and when I checked one major source, the link was to a dead blog; there’s also no information about the subject’s history and no explanation about how the methodology she used to makes her predictions as a forecaster, which is mostly what makes her notable.

This was remedied with research. Instead of 5 sources (one of which is a dead link to a defunct personal blog), there are now 39 reliable sources and more than 60 citations, including full-length profiles of her from The Washington Post, The Los Angeles Times, USA Today, Newsweek Magazine, The Chicago Tribune, Biography Magazine and two full-length profiles of her from The New York Times. These are all cited in the draft.

In brief, here are the key issues with the current article as I see them:
 * Article is lacking in information about the subject’s early history, career and methodology.
 * Use of sources that do not meet WP:RS and lack of sources for some information
 * Article has not been updated for five years with most recent significant coverage from reliable sources.

Popcorn has written three best-selling books, plus a fourth book, so is in the press constantly. In addition, I was able to make the article current via recent articles from 2014-5. To do this draft, I read more than 80 sources so I could create a comprehensive article. There are hundreds of highly reliable sources, as per WP:NEWSORG, spanning four decades. Since the 1980s, she has been consistently quoted as an expert prognosticator about future trends, including by Newsweek, Business Week, The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, The Financial Times, USA Today, The Los Angeles Times, There have been several fixes and additions over the years. I have left everything with a source in tact, including criticisms. When there was no source, I tried to find a source and succeeded in most cases, even with critical material. I have left almost all language from the current article in tact, as well, unless it was unsourced and I could not locate a source despite my extensive research. In some cases, I added slightly more detail after finding a reliable source. I have reviewed the Talk section to make sure I did not reverse any previous decisions (including Jimmy Wales weighing in on removing a "Criticism" section), such as including her birth name, and excluding the date of birth, which had (and has) conflicting sources that I still could not resolve.

At this point, though, not so much that individual "fixes" are needed to the article, but more that whole sections are missing and needed drafting.

I’ve established via reliable sourcing that her clients, as a futurist, include some of the largest and most iconic brands in the world. E.g. McDonald’s, Coca Cola, IBM, American Express, Bayer, etc. While not as famous as futurist Alvin Toffler, she’s still among the most famous in her field. I have avoided placing promotional touts in the article with which she’s been labeled by the press (e.g. called the “Nostradamus” of marketing by Fortune), but here I can say she’s beyond just being notable. She even coined two phrases in common usage (“Cashing out” and “Cocooning”), on of which is now in the Merriam Webster dictionary (“Cocooning”). The notability of the subject of the article, and consistent “significant coverage” by reliable sourced for forty years, suggests to me the article should be fleshed out more. I attempted to do this while maintaining WP:NPOV — Preceding unsigned comment added by BC1278 (talk • contribs) 17:35, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

I've placed the full proposed draft in userspace https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BC1278/sandbox#Career but I'd be just as happy to work through section by section, if that's what editors prefer. Please take a look and feel free to make any edits directly in the draft, although I'd suggest discussing any larger edits or concerns here. Comments and questions are welcome. Thanks! BC1278 (talk) 20:52, 26 May 2015 (UTC)BC1278


 * I didn't read the wall of text above, but the draft itself looked mostly fine. I trimmed a lot of the Career section that was promotional name-dropping, while keeping some of the name-dropping that had more substance. CorporateM (Talk) 04:47, 23 June 2015 (UTC)