Talk:Sara C. Bisel

WP:COI
The article looks WP:NPOV to me. Maybe we should a request for comment or review to make sure. Cheers, :) Dloh cierekim  13:29, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I really don’t know whether it maintains a neutral point of view or not, or how notable Sara C. Bisel is in the context of a Wikipedia article. I added the coi template because the article has essentially only one author who appears to be related to the subject. He/she may be doing an excellent job. Alternatively he/she may have fallen into the trap of unconsciously exaggerating the importance of the subject. It’s a trap that even experienced editors fall into when writing about something that enthuses them. (I know I do, now and then.)


 * So yes, I think there is a case for trying to find an editor who is familiar with the field to see whether or not the article needs to be toned down a bit. (Or toned up.) —Ian Spackman 14:40, 18 October 2007 (UTC)


 * in any case, it is not a speedy deletion for notability--it makes a clear claim to notability. DGG (talk) 19:17, 18 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Bisel is a significant archaeologist, having done importatn long-term work in Italy and in physical anthropology related to forensic anthropology. On the other hand, it is wrong to say she helped usher in FA:  Dorsey, Hrdlicka and Stewart worked in  and developed the field before she did - just to mention three compatriots of hers.  Around the beginning of the 20th century, osteohistological work was done in Hungary that, though not named FA, was in that area.  See also Schwidetzky, I. (1954). "Forensic anthropology in Germany," Human Biology 26:1–20.Kdammers (talk) 07:58, 25 March 2009 (UTC)