Talk:Zoe Williams

Humour piece
A "humour piece" is a type of article. Whether or not such an article is funny is subjective, but it can be objectively refered to as a "humour piece" if it is written in a certain style and intended to be humourous. MuttGirl 19:23, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Editing own article
I wonder if Strobes will note the "corrections" to this article in the next issue...


 * What kind of a ghastly cretin amends their own Wiki entry in such a manner? Objective journalism - shurely?  :)    Darth Doctrinus 19:39, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm guessing it's just a fan who was doing the weird fan thing of taking the name as a pseudonym. Either that or someone who actively dislikes Williams and was trying to stir things up, possibly by writing to the Eye themselves - it's an odd coincidence that the "Zoewilliams" user added the Eye as a reference to an article only a week and a half ago.
 * I've left a message on the user's talk page to see if we can clear it up, but "Wikipedia article edited by unverified account with same name" does seem pretty weak and inconclusive stuff for the Eye to run with, or to include in a Wikipedia biography. --McGeddon 20:30, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

It's worth noting that the Eye Article was about another journalist, Peter Hitchens, not about Zoe. Her alleged self-editing was merely mentioned as a postscript. As such, it's definitely not worth including in her biography - after all, it's not deemed worth mentioning in Hitchens', and he was the subject of the article. So - I'm removing it. Eliot 13:44, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

FWIW she didn't seem the type at university to blow her own trumpet that much... and also far too clever to consider changing her own write-up! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.217.52.130 (talk • contribs).

Yes, I have removed this note about Williams' self-publicity again. It might be funny for a while, but not in an encyclopedia. Also, a sentence in Private Eye is hardly 'much publicity'.Onaraighl 19:32, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Deleting quotes
I will include SOURCED quotes when I want, regardless of anyone elses pet project to delete them.

Quotes
"Williams writing for The Guardian on March 29, 2007, claimed actor Rhys Ifans shouldn't have apologised for making a joke about paedophilia" - why is this any more notable than any of her other articles? If there was a controversy surrounding her article, a source would be useful. --McGeddon 19:49, 5 April 2007 (UTC)


 * So what, whats your problem? --Dean1970 19:50, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, it was controversial enough for a child protection agency to weigh in after the joke was made, get over it buddy. --Dean1970 19:51, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * If there was a controversy surrounding Zoe Williams, then that's fine, please write about it and give some sources. But if you're just choosing two random articles to give us two random quotes from, this doesn't seem a particularly encyclopaedic or insightful way to expand the article. --McGeddon 20:15, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

The article itself quotes the (NSCCP). In fact, Ms Williams took issue with them too, perhaps I could expand it to include that? --Dean1970 20:29, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

p.s. You're keen to tell me what to do on wikipedia, why don't you expand on it by adding other quotes and placing them in between the two i've added. That way theres a little distance from the two I added.

p.p.s. The NSCCP phone number is 0808 800 8000, why don't you call them, repeat the joke, and see if its 'controversial'? --Dean1970 20:29, 5 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm just keen to make sure that Wikipedia articles adhere to established Wikipedia guidelines for article quality. Quotes are fine if they illustrate some wider point about Williams' or her work, but isolated and apparently random selections serve no purpose. (Even Wikipedia articles on comedians avoid lists of quotes.)
 * And I agree completely that the joke was controversial, I'm just saying that it doesn't have anything to do with Zoe Williams, apart from the fact that she wrote about it once. If the NSPCC reacted to her and she got caught up in the controversy, then it could be regarded as encyclopaedic, but it's obviously meaningless to keep track of "journalist has an opinion of a single news event" in a Wikipedia biography. --McGeddon 20:54, 5 April 2007 (UTC)


 * If my sourced quotes really irk you so much just delete them, I'm not going to argue the toss with you all day. --Dean1970 21:00, 5 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm just not convinced that they meet Wikipedia criteria for inclusion. I've deleted them, but if you want to add a proper prose section explaining William's views about free speech or the environment, then please do. --McGeddon 10:16, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

If she digs free speech so much I doubt she'd mind me exercising mine on this page? --Dean1970 22:34, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps someone would care to add her regular and long-running columns in 'Now' magazine? She's not so classy as is made out in the article! (this is from an anonymous source)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Zoe Williams. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20080204215700/http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk:80/?storyID=6274&authorID=375 to http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/?storyID=6274&authorID=375
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110519162943/http://www.ipcmedia.com/press/now_-_bigger_better__glossier_press_56873.html to http://www.ipcmedia.com/press/now_-_bigger_better__glossier_press_56873.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:15, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

WP:RS check for Nation.Cymru
I requested here a check to confirm whether nation.cymru counts as reliable source. Maybe best to reply there rather than here, to avoid splitting any discussion. --Dani di Neudo (talk) 09:00, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Is she really Welsh?
Williams is a popular name in Wales. But she was born in London. Perhaps she should be called British, to be on the safe side? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.131.105.197 (talk) 01:12, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Her being Welsh is sourced to an article in Nation.Cymru. This is not circular referencing because at the date of the Nation.Cymru article we described Williams as English. I think this is sufficient. Verbcatcher (talk) 16:19, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Tag removed per Verbcatcher Boynamedsue (talk) 17:24, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

This is a tweet she sent. I think it's odd that she didn't mention that she's Welsh.

"I still think learning a not-very-widely-spoken language is a lot of effort for low reward. It does not follow that I hate Wales, the Welsh, the Welsh language or its speakers. I do not hate performative offence-takers, though I’ve muted a few. I do not even hate cottage cheese" 5:41 PM · Feb 3, 2020·Twitter Web App

I don't know how Wikpedia or Nation.Cyrmus decide Welshness but this might help. Fun fact - my wife found out through her family history researches that I am very distantly related to ZW (through of her halIf/step relatives). I have never met or had any communication with ZW, but I have been able to see a (private) family tree on one of the on-line family history websites adn so I will share this information, although youll just have to trust me that it is accruate. FAther: Mark Williams, born in Hertfordshire. 1939. Mother: Cecily Gwen Evans, born in Eastbourne. G-father: Peter Claringbould Williams, born Staffordshire. NO info on paternal g-mother or maternal g-parents.