Talk:Juliet Lee-Franzini

Notability tag
, can you help establish that this meets WP:BIO or WP:GNG? Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 19:54, 6 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Donna Helene was part of a sockpuppet farm of PR people that all got indef blocked, so no they can't help. See Sockpuppet investigations/Factsonlyplease39/Archive for more details. Joseph2302 (talk) 20:48, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Notability and close connection
I just read this article as carefully as I could, and it is hard for me to see what makes this article look like the creator had a close connection to the subject. Every fact is referenced, and there are no superfluous words which make Franzini look especially good, bad, or otherwise. Considering that she is no longer among the living, what possible benefit is there to the writer, or the subject of the article, which would cause a wikipedia editor to place such a tag on the article? As for the notability tag, I would think that wikipedia would be happy to have an article about an early woman in science. She taught all over the world, discovered several particles, and was a pioneer in her field of physics. Isn't that enough to be notable? On https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_%28people%29#Creative_professionals it says the following: 1.The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors. 2.The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique. I believe Juliet Lee-Franzini is notable enough for Wikipedia, and I do not see any reason to believe the article deserves the COI tag either. I am removing both tags, therefore. It is a stub, however, and can use some more information and editing. I will look for that tag to place on the article.104.236.38.205 (talk) 10:12, 26 August 2015 (UTC)