Talk:Florence Devouard/Archive 1

The quote
"It’s possible one day I’ll be more proud of Wikipedia than of the kids."

I think it's perfectly reasonable to include the quote. The contribution displayed no bias, and refers to her greatest source of fame in the general sphere. If we're to ignore stuff that is unimportant/frivolous, we could quite happily delete the whole article on Jordan (Katie Price).

Initial comments
I hope this lasts awhile before it hits VfD.... --JuntungWu 06:52, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

For informational purposes, Angela Beesley went through VfD in April 2005 and was kept. Votes for deletion/Angela Beesley. Anyone considering nominating this article for deletion should keep that in mind. -- Seth Ilys 14:24, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * And we are supposed to pretend that Wikipedia does not have systematic bias?! Pcb21| Pete 18:35, 16 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Are we? Of course it has, anyone attempting to deny that would be overwhelmed with counterexamples.
 * Well, I am slightly inclusionist, since there's really no limit to articles number (the more articles, the more popularity, the more resources), but it's somewhat disturbing when full articles on out-wiki somewhat notable people get deleted, but don't you dare touch an article about a Wikimedia employee, which only says that they were born in City, Country, on Month, Day, Year, and are a member of BoT.
 * CP/Mcomm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 12:24, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree with you ! It is ridiculous and shameful... Euroflux (talk) 21:26, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

The Vote
Congratulations. Apwoolrich 12:42, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Congrats! From me too! WP:POST :) =Nichalp   «Talk»=  16:39, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Not deleting it doesn't harm anybody, but...
does anybody really think this can grow to more than a stub? Not intending to troll here, I like the idea of people tributing florence with an article. It's just I'm really curious about whether there's anyone who really expects this to become a real encyclopedic article. (PS: having the same thougths with angela, anthere & timshell) (BTW, félicitations par votre bébé) --euyyn 03:09, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks :-) (for the baby)

For the future of the article, I suspect it will depend on what my own future will be. Time will say. Anthere


 * Well, hey, of course, maybe in the future you go into space or become the richer woman in the world for decades, but that was not what I was talking about, hehe.
 * I consider "stub" to be an inacceptable state for an encyclopedic article. But as WP is somehow a constant "work in progress", and it's better for our users to see stubs than not to see anything at all, we show them. Yes, the article isn't marked as a stub. I think it is, anyway.
 * So suppose we freezed the outer/real world, and hence we had all the time to edit this article until it weren't a stub anymore. Could we really do it? Would there be enough secondary sources for us? Etc. --euyyn 22:32, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure there would be enough primary sources to write something interesting. Pokemons are cooler. CP/Mcomm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 12:48, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Afd started by banned user
The Afd was stopped because it was started by a banned user. FloNight  talk  20:09, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Unemployed
Saying that someone is "currenmtly unemployed" strikes me as odd and slightly unencyclopedic, even if it is technically true. For many mothers managing a household can keep them very employed. Saying that someone is unemployed can of hidden implications that the person may or may not be looking for a job, or it can even imply a POV that the society may have about the protestant work ethic. It's there in a comment like, "He was a Wikipedia editor until he had to get a real job." I would be inclined to remove that sentence. It seems to me that there are more ways to value work that through the medium of the economic marketplace; work that has been freed still has a value. Eclecticology 18:16, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Board of Trustees
The above, within the article, returns the article entitled Trustee and Trustees.
 * I recommend the following: Board of Trustees of Wikimedia Foundation, assuming that that is the correct name.
 * Best regards to everybody in WP Cyberspace, Ludvikus 23:20, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Who's Who of the Wikimedia Foundation
Here's what we known: Yours truly, Ludvikus 23:26, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

WP:BIO
This article does not meet WP:BIO and should not be in Wikipedia, but it might be reasonable to transfer it to meta.wikimedia.org and have similar profiles of the other WMF board members. 64.160.39.153 00:54, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Succeeded Jimbo, yes?
Jimbo was the previous chair, right? I get confused with all the top positions at corporations and foundations. Did he hold the position she now has, or just some other one(s)? Milto LOL pia 00:49, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Which image?
Which pic should be up? The personal photo is nice, but wouldn't it be better to have one of her "on the scene", doing what makes her notable? Milto LOL pia 15:02, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Self-reference
Generally, Wikipedia can't be used as a source for itself, yet that can only be what has occurred here, for our sources fail to establish notability. The first is Wikimedia's own website, which shows that she indeed holds a position on the board of the Foundation; the remaining two only verify her degrees. Such material would be more appropriately hosted on Wikimedia's website. I strongly recommend the deletion of this article.Proabivouac 07:12, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Chair of the board controlling one of the top 10 websites is notable. Wikimedia can be used to establish that, although using  Wikipedia articles would be either circular, unreliable, or should quote the source that the article itself quotes, or in certain circumstances should use a permalink. That is "sourcing" half of the reason for avoiding sel-references. Rich Farmbrough, 08:29 27  April 2007 (GMT).
 * Why not an article on the Arbitration Committee, as its role in "controlling one of the top 10 websites is notable?" Isn't it possible that someone who does not edit Wikipedia will have a different perception of our own importance? The only way to answer this is to rely on external sources on a case-by-case basis. Here we have none.Proabivouac 08:39, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree with Proabivouac. This is an autobiography in disguise. "conseiller municipal" of a village with 900 inhabitants in the middle of nowhere... who cares ? Why give the christian names + dates of birth of the 3 children ?? "conseiller municipal" was put on the explicit request of the subject... Euroflux (talk) 21:24, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
 * There is no evidence whatsoever that this is an autobiography. The names and birth years of her children are sourced to an article in the Sunday Times. Devouard's notability doesn't depend on her being "conseiller municipal", but on being covered in sources like that. I agree that it's a bit thin. Of course, you can take it to AfD (be sure to follow the technical instructions correctly and to search for other sources first), if you feel very strong about it. As this is a so-called BLP, though, you should either do that or refrain from posting unfounded suspicions here (or provide proof for them), because they could be construed as a personal attack on Devouard. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 21:38, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Ask for an advice about defamation and posibble copyright violation
Hi, I contact to you because I'm worry about an article in wikipedia in spanish, the specific articles is http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_Quality_Project, one user called Mixepitelix, is carrying on a defamation campaign over Life Quality Project Civil Asociation, as you can see at the article (is hide right now), the discussion archive http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discusi%C3%B3n:Life_Quality_Project/Archivo, and continue once again in actual discussion http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discusi%C3%B3n:Life_Quality_Project.

I have to mention too that this user have linked a book that violates copyright law in the same discussion as title "Texto digitalizado del libro "La Via", de Juan Sgolastra", and seeing the following articles: http://www.webtvwire.com/linking-to-infringing-content-is-probably-illegal-in-the-us/ "Is Linking to Infringing Content Illegal in the US? Like it or not the short answer is yes." http://www.webtvwire.com/linking-law-expert-dr-stephan-ott-talks-about-linking-to-pirated-video/ "In my opinion linking to infringing content is unlawful and that is also what most of the courts say."

But I think that you have more expertice than me for evaluate this case. Due to this expertise, I feel under obligation to do ask you what could I do about this two items: defamation and copyright violation. I´m very worry to have to turn to you about this conflict, and more knowing that is in spanish lenguaje, but I feel that librarians are not taking this affair as seriously as really is.

Best regards,

Aguirrel 16:58, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Please send me a copy
Hi Florance,

You had an e-mail corresponcence with Spiritia (Bg:User:Spritia). Your answer was published in bgWiki talk page: bg:Уикипедия:Разговори.

Please send me a copy of the original message to which you reply. What you call "the community" didn't provide the other editors with the message that was sent to you. Or at least didn't provide me with the message, and I'm personally interested in it. bg:Потребител:ИнжИнера

Best regards,--Injinera 17:38, 27 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Full text of the letter is available here. BloodIce 21:19, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

This probably isn't the place to contact Florence directly. You should be taking it to her Wikipedia or Meta talk page. VanTucky 21:21, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Where? Type the direct links, please. --Injinera 06:19, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Sunday Times profile
More material for the article: - note that stuff only seems to stay up for a short time on the online version - David Gerard 10:01, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The Inquirer picked the information and pointed to this page here, just in case we get some extra visitors. -- ReyBrujo 19:00, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Nickname
Anthere redirects to this page, yet the nick is not mentioned anywhere on it. I added to her name as Florence "Anthere" Devouard, but it was reverted with no comment. What's wrong with this? For reference, note that Jimmy Wales is listed on his page as Jimmy Donal "Jimbo" Wales. Jpatokal 14:22, 9 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Jimbo is a derivative of his name and he uses that nickname in public. If the article read Florence "Florry" (not that she uses that nickname) Devouard, that would be different. I think it would be more appropriate to add that Anthere is her online nick as a separate line. --  Manticore  TalkundefinedContributions 11:28, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I redirected Anthere to Stamen in an effort to avoid self-references and because it is the French spelling of Anther (which makes sense given that Florence Devouard is an agronomist from France). IronGargoyle (talk) 06:38, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

rv
Could someone remove the recent vandalism from the page history?--Alnokta 08:27, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Question about Wikimedia Sverige
Hello,

I know that this is problably not one of your normal duties, but as we are starting a local chapter here in Sweden (our startup meeting is in October), we're in the process of writing a statement to the press (for release a little nearer to the actual meeting) and we were wondering if we could get a quote from you about the new chapter, in the lines of "I know that many people in Sweden use Wikipedia because of its high quality and this is a good way of supporting that quality, as well as free content in general." Well, if you could phrase it any better, that would be preferable, but in case you're busy, I'd settle for that.

Thanks in advance, Hannibal (press contact on Swedish Wikipedia)//83.248.142.123 08:51, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Plainte pour vandalisme en bande
Je ne suis pas sur d'être à la bonne adresse mais je vous informe que l'utilisateur JEAN LUC ANGRAND est bloqué et a demandé à être débloqué. La raison fournie est : Vandalisme de POPO le chien alias Keriluamox sur de nombreuses pages utilisant mes contributions. Est-ce autorisé d'avoir deux comptes d'administrateurs sur Wikipédia ? Il semble qu'un petit groupe est mis au point une stratégie de controle de Wikipédia par la création de compte multiple et donc d'avoir la possibilité d'être plusieurs fois ADMINISTRATEUR. J'en informe WIKIPEDIA FRANCE et demande une vérification concernant POPO et sa petite tribut.

The user.JEAN LUC ANGRAND is blocked and asked to be freed. The provided reason is: Vandalism of POPO the dog alias Keriluamox on many pages using my contributions. Is this authorized to have two accounts of administrators on Wikipédia? Vandalism of POPO the dog alias Keriluamox on many pages using my contributions. Is this authorized to have two accounts of administrators on Wikipédia? It seems that a small group is developed a strategy of control of Wikipédia by the multiple creation of account and thus to have the possibility of being several times ADMINISTRATOR. I inform WIKIPEDIA FRANCE and request of it a checking relating to POPO and his small tribute. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.35.148.36 (talk) 10:43, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

This biography is an autobiography in disguise.
Just see the Talk page in French ! Anthere takes enormous care of her own biography.She explicitly tells her friends what they should add on her own biography, in order for her to get a job.She insists that her quality of "conseiller municipal" (village counsellor) of a village with 900 inhabitants in the middle of nowhere should be indicated.Anthere even gives some technical tricks (subpage written by somebody else, in order not to be traced !)…his whole process is ridiculous, unprofessional, unethical.As several people already pointed out, this biography does not meet WP:BIO requirements.This autobiography is empty. No notable achievement in the field of agronomy, nor in the field of Wikipedia, nor anywhere else… In my humble opinion it should be removed.http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discussion:Florence_Devouard#Autobiographie1 Autobiographie Au cas où vous choisissiez de conserver l'article, et bien qu'il soit déconseillé d'éditer sa propre biographie, j'ai apporté des modifications à l'article, car il était erroné. Mon diplôme principal est un diplôme d'ingénieur et non un DEA. Je n'ai jamais travaillé pour l'INPL. Je suis actuellement sans emploi (et donc préfère que l'article ne mentionne pas mon ancien emploi comme étant toujours mon emploi, au cas où quelqu'un ait envie de m'embaucher, n'est ce pas ? :-)).N'y a-t-il pas une confusion dans l'infobox entre "profession" et "activité principale" ? Etre sans emploi ne signifie pas sans profession. Il me semble que tout le monde a une "profession", surtout après avoir obtenu un diplôme d'ingénieur + un DEA et exercé quelques années ! On pourrait mettre par exemple comme métier "ingénieur agronome" ou "généticienne". Et l'activité principale, ça serait "présidente de la Wikimédia Foundation" (ou mère au foyer Clin d'œil). Moumine bavarder gaiement 15 janvier 2007 à 14:51 (CET) Deman,de à la principale intéressée — Kyle_the_hacker ¿! le 15 janvier 2007 à 21:03 (CET)je ne suis pas sure... en tous cas, pas "généticienne". C'est très ancien. Je pense qu'ingénieur agronome est approprié. Mère au foyer est également vrai. Et je confirme, je suis sans statusAntherehttp://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discussion:Florence_Devouard#Oserais-je_.3F3 Oserais-je ? [URL] lien [URL] lienDepuis dimanche dernier, je suis conseillère munipale de mon ptit village. J'aimerais bien que cela soit rajouté, mais ne veux pas le faire moi-même. Si une bonne âme passe dans le coin... Anthere (d) 13 mars 2008 à 21:56 (CET)http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discussion:Florence_Devouard#Mise_.C3.A0_jour(CEST)6 Mise à jour [URL] lien [URL] lienBonjour,Je voudrais procéder à différentes mises à jour sur mon article (voir http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erik_Moeller en comparaison :- pour clarifier "situation professionnelle", "liens vers site personnel", "Wikimedia France", "OurMed" etc.... Que préférez vous que je fasse ? Editer directement l'article (avec votre validation ultérieure et si nécessaire nettoyage de mes ajouts, complément de sources etc...en bonne entente). Ou rédaction dans une sous-page (puis publication par autrui; l'inconvénient étant la traçabilité). Ou rédaction dans la page de discussion et mise à jour par un autre éditeur ? Anthere (d) 17 juin 2008 à 12:43 (CEST)amha, tu peux y aller directement. Tu es la mieux placée pour mettre des infos véridiques, et tu n'est pas soupçonnée de tripatouillage. Comme tu dis, nous jetterons un œil pour peaufiner, voire élaguer un peu... Cordialement, et avec tous mes remerciements pour la qualité et l'importance de ton engagement. --MGuf 17 juin 2008 à 12:56 (CEST) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Euroflux (talk • contribs)


 * This French stuff shouldn't be posted here at all and someone should get rid of it - this is the English Wikipedia  - in English  - the post from this user also seems very attacking and opinionated in nature - if they think this person is not notable then go for it - nominate it for WP:AFD deletion discussion - don't post screeds/rants in foreign languages on the talkpage -  You  really  can  19:00, 25 October 2012 (UTC)