Talk:Miriam Stoppard

Half Man Half Biscuit
Is there someone, possibly a member of the band or an obsessed fan, deliberately going around Wikipedia referencing Half Man Half Biscuit? Think of a famous but cultish person from 1980s popular UK history and you can bet that HMHB get a mention, sometimes at greater lengthh than the actual person the page is about. It's tedious. Guv2006 (talk) 21:05, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Ditto Weird Al Yankovic for the US. Some people seem to treat him as test of encylcopaedic notability.

Notes on "Controversy"
To call something a controversy you need independent reliable sources identifying it as such. Also; can I point everyone at WP:BLP (which requires sourcing on biographies of living individuals to be exemplary), WP:NPOV (which cautions us against soapboxing our views) and WP:OR (which discusses how we are not supposed to do our own research). The sourcing in question here is bad; lacking secondary sources discussing the matter, synthesising material to reach an originally research conclusion, and non-neutral terms attacking the subject. --08:40, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Recently she similarly stuck her neck out about circumcision, and I considred adding something but didn't think it was notable enough, although in that case Christian Jessen spoke out against her; I'd say about the latest issue that there isn't really anything to make it notable, although it would seem worthwhile to give an account of advice she's given that's remarkable. It could be especially difficult to find a source reliable enough to be cited as an example of condemnation of Stoppard because of the policy not to use self-published material as a source about a living person even if the writer is well-regarded.Billwilson5060 (talk) 14:42, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
 * The key thing is editorial oversight; which is why personal blogs/sites aren't acceptable sources. But if a critic writes an article for a reputable outlet (i.e. news/media/magazine) there is no reason in theory why that would not be acceptable. --Errant (chat!) 15:11, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Strictly speaking, there doesn’t seem to be any reason for including the breastfeeding section, especially with the hint she puts Nestle above good health, as there are no third-party sources to refer to – the inclusion reflects the fact that the article has caused uproar, with many people deeming her incompetent, corrupt, etc, but that uproar isn’t reflected in something that could be cited.Billwilson5060 (talk) 10:04, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * That's the key issue; it seems to be a lot of hot air from insignificant commentators. I can't find any reliably published criticism of her words. Storm in a teacup, that sort of thing. I wouldn't be opposed to removing it. --Errant (chat!) 10:20, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

I’m not sure how the Independent article can be said to use Wikipedia for the info that she works with Nestle – it quotes "Jayne Threlfall, Midwife and International Board Certified Lactation" (word missing?), who would appear to be aware of the matter. It’s also open that she works with them here:. Interestingly, she chaired a discussion on the issue last year, which appears to have concluded that sustained breastfeeding should be promoted.Billwilson5060 (talk) 11:20, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * True; it has been pointed out she clearly is working with Nestle. I'm not sure about the "promoting formula milk" bit. --Errant (chat!) 13:29, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * It now refers to a reference to a “possible conflict of interest”; there could perhaps be slight tweaks to this. To accuse her of changing advice for Nestle or promoting forumla milk at all (the Nestle page is behind a disclaimer that it is information not advertising and that breastfeeding is better) are serious accusations. It could be interesting to see if there’s any response.Billwilson5060 (talk) 20:48, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Just to note; editors at The Independent have removed the article most of that section was sourced to, so I've had to cut our content here (obviously). --Errant (chat!) 13:47, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Miriam Stoppard. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120904040742/http://www.ucl.ac.uk/ich/ich-news/Article12 to http://www.ucl.ac.uk/ich/ich-news/Article12
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20130420025034/http://www.dorlingkindersley-uk.co.uk/static/cs/uk/11/features/stoppard/index.html to http://www.dorlingkindersley-uk.co.uk/static/cs/uk/11/features/stoppard/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:52, 30 November 2017 (UTC)