Talk:Gail Berman

Self-promotion
This article recently change significantly, and now reads like a press bio. Article requires cleanup. 131.96.47.17 (talk) 22:47, 5 June 2012 (UTC)


 * It appears that the bio was written and is patrolled by a PR firm.


 * I've noticed that all references to her involvement in Firefly's cancellation have been removed, including references. Quoting her own statement in an interview is not defamatory (certainly doesn't violate WP:BLP) and since many of the references that establish her notability in the first place stem from her work with Joss Whedon and her involvement in Firefly's cancellation, it's not a violation of WP:DUE to mention it. Insofar as she's notable at all, it's for this. The current language simply says that "she worked on the series", which is entirely at odds with her involvement as reported in the media. The original language from a few years ago was well-sourced, relied mainly on direct quotations of her, and fit it all in two short sentences.


 * The new "resume" format of the bio goes in reverse chronological order, which doesn't fit with the style of other Wikipedia bio articles. There are several links provided; about half are to groups she's a member of, and the other half to genuinely reliable sources... but very few citations for her bio in-line. It's worth mentioning that the user who wrote much of the new bio has a contribution history that appears consistent with what you'd see from a sock puppet account used by a PR firm. Once a year, you get a full day's worth of heavy activity editing pages for media companies and studio executives, then total inactivity.


 * I'm thinking the smart way to manage this is to write something based on the consensus article from last year, updated to current information, and then watch to see who tries to revert it and why. 24.99.56.211 (talk) 04:59, 17 July 2016 (UTC)


 * I agree. I came here after happening to watch this YouTube video where Alan Tudyk recounts Berman telling him how she tried changing this Wikipedia page to remove the Firefly material, which is a clear Conflict of interest violation.  That in itself doesn't mean the material belongs in the article, but raises questions about why it is no longer in there and other issues with the page. - 66.215.236.136 (talk) 04:04, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Vandalism in Careers section
This article appears to have been vandalized. The first lines of the Career section are a personal insult with incomplete punctuation. 68.132.208.227 (talk) 02:49, 14 December 2022 (UTC)