Talk:Kathryn Troutman/Archives/2013

COI
The author of this article,, has a declared conflict of interest. However, I have worked with them in userspace to ensure that the article is neutral and referenced, and they have assured me that they intend to adhere to best practices, ie not to edit the article directly.

For the history of various work in developing the article, see their talkpage, and one of the part-way reviews here.  Chzz  ►  02:19, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Review of the article, with regard to WP:COI

 * The lede section (the first bit, before the first section heading) is too long; the idea of the lede is to summarize the rest of the article, and hence, ideally, it shouldn't have any information that is not elaborated upon in the body text. For an article of this size, the lede should be about 2 or 3 paragraphs. Also note that the lede should either be fully-referenced or have no references at all (other than direct quotations, which are an exception to the rule). Personally, I prefer having no refs in the lede - because all the details should be in the body text with appropriate refs. Please see WP:LEDE.


 * "has been described as an expert" - I don't see any point in wikilinking the word 'expert', per WP:OVERLINK. Also, because this is such a strong POV-type statement, I'm checking it with care. Let's look;
 * Washington post says, "An expert on searching for and obtaining government work,"
 * Uni of Balt says, "Federal Employment Expert"
 * Asktheheadhunter says, "Troutman is the expert on navigating the maze of federal job hunting"
 * I don't feel that the second two of these are necessarily great sources; they're certainly not neutral and independent. None of this really verifies the facts stated, ie an expert in "Knowledge Skills and Abilities statements, and on federal career consulting in general". Even if we accept the sources, they do not explicity state that. To be honest, I think the statement should be removed; I think this is quite a claassic example of why it is so difficult to remain neutral when writing with a conflict of interest. Just my opinion, of course - that's all I can give.


 * "worked more than 35 years in this field, published ten books on this subject that have sold tens of thousands of copies"
 * The use of these superlatives definitely puts a POV spin to this phrase. The reference is weak too - what interview, where, published by whom?


 * "estimated 10,000 work-hours" - similarly, a very hard to determine 'fact', and the ref doesn't currently make sense


 * Troutman created the format and name for the new “Federal Resume”
 * the reference for this is a) obviously an editorial-type piece, and b) does not seem to actually assert that she "created the format and name" (unless I'm missing something)


 * "is the designer of the Federal Resume" - a bold, unreferenced claim


 * "Military to Federal Career Guide, which is currently used in [...] career transition centers worldwide"
 * bold, unreferenced claim


 * "Best Career Guide of 2003 by the Publishers Marketing Association" - I'm not too happy that this is only referenced to a publisher; I tried searching, but couldn't seem to find any official confirmation of this. On the reference provided, it doesn't actually seem clear that she won the award, or was a finallist in a category or whatever. The only mentions that I could find were on "The Resume Place" itself


 * "Troutman is a Federal Career Coach and a Certified Career Management Coach"


 * ..."specialized expertise in government careers" not neutral


 * "advises job-seekers pursuing Senior Executive Service appointments, and provides career management advice for all career levels" - according to whom?


 * Rest of lede lacks citations


 * "Early life and education" is almost entirely unreferenced, and I doubt that RS will be available for these details, so it should be removed The ref "provided during interviews with Troutman, August 2009." is not acceptable, because it is not verifiable.


 * "Early career" as above, contains lots of weasel words, peacock terms, and reads like an advert. For example, "provided one of the first professional resume services", "Troutman set the standards", "more than 20 international interviews", "numerous television crews" etc.
 * Also, "In 1981, the staff heard sirens and helicopters around their office after President Reagan had been shot by John Hinckley, Jr., just one mile up the street at the Washington Hilton Hotel" - what has this got to do with Troutman?


 * "Writing and Media" - several of these references look inappropriate, ie not WP:RS - for example (and I haven't checked them all), Amazon.com (not a reliable source) and several refs to Resume Place.


 * There are similar problems to previous sections - non-neutral text e.g. "popular curriculum", weasel-words e.g. "many U.S. colleges", and peacock terms e.g. "how to write the best annual evaluation"

 Chzz  ►  19:41, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Request re. Washington Post
This week, the Washington Post featured two stories on Kathryn Troutman and her Federal resume consulting business. I would like to add both stories to the references on this page: (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2010/05/26/ST2010052606033.html?sid=ST2010052606033) and (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/26/AR2010052606018.html?sid=ST2010052606033).

In the first story, Troutman is described as a "federal resume and job hunting expert and erstwhile GovExec.com columnist." She is also described as: "She has long been one of the world's leading experts on navigating the federal hiring process. I would like for both quotes to be added to the article, if you concur, using the WPost story as the reference.

Please let me know if you need more information. Thanks!!

Burkeguy

--Burkeguy (talk) 19:13, 28 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I've looked at this request, but I don't agree; I don't see that those quotes add to the encyclopaedic content of the article - it already states her skillset; see WP:QUOTEFARM.  Chzz  ► 14:18, 14 June 2010 (UTC)