Talk:Steven A. Beebe

negative tags on article
There were some negative tags, about primary sources and about neutrality and about external links, which I just removed because I don't see the issues. The tags pointed to this Talk page for discussion. If someone does see some issue, please do explain it here. By the way, i found my way to this article by a posting at a noticeboard, mentioning this article as a product of students in a class. It seems like a fine work, to me! :) -- do ncr  am  02:31, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I think you were a bit quick to remove the tage. It would be better to discuss your reasons for disagreeing with them before removing them. At first read through the article I have to question the use of references too. The article is a good start but there are clearly some problems (many easily fixed):


 * Bare URLs (rather than proper citations) as refs
 * Blogs are generally not reliable references... anyone can write whatever in a blog.
 * POV comments such as "Beebe's most acknowledged appearances."
 * Fuzzy time periods such as "This past fall."
 * The YouTube video as a ref may be questionable. It seems to be used properly as a ref to what he says in the lecture, but it is not clear what the College means by "Standard YouTube " permission or copyright (Idon't remember the exact term).
 * There are quite a few primary refs in this article.
 * There really isn't that much here to show his notability. Most of the sources are primary refs showing what he said, or PR/bio type pages.. Where are the independent reliable sources?
 * inline external links in (OK, I see you've mentioned that already). Meters (talk) 03:13, 6 May 2014 (UTC)