Talk:Dictionary of New Zealand Biography

To do

Add something about Nga Tangata Taumata Rau. Nurg (talk) 22:57, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

New Zealand biographies

The section was supposed to show how the new encyclopedia included more women and minories, yet there were only two sentences about 19th century prostitutes. I felt that was in appropriate, as the effort to include more women and minorities had already been mentioned, and the use of two examples, particularly these two, seem to violate WP:RS and WP:TONE.--Bellerophon5685 (talk) 02:43, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

@Bellerophon5685: Sorry for the revert; I guess if you had explained your actions in an edit summary, I wouldn't have been quite so harsh. There's a lot of background to the section that you removed, and this should be referred to from this talk page, but it isn't. Stuartyeates, where did we discuss the representative entries? Schwede66 06:12, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

It's been discussed in a number of places, including Wikipedia:Notability/Noticeboard/Archive_8#Dictionary_of_New_Zealand_Biography_as_an_authority_for_notability. I supect that someone is going to have to write some test from scratch. Stuartyeates (talk) 09:15, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Taking two random examples may be WP:OR in the first place, because how does one decide which two articles showcases the new encyclopedias' commitment to inclusion of women and minorities? These two examples, an Irish and a Scottish prostitute, IMHO, are not a good example, as they have no pre-established notability. Perhaps someone with access to the book could find a woman and a rpresentative of one of NZ's minorities that already has an article. As it, it almost looks like WP:VANDALISM.--Bellerophon5685 (talk) 17:52, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

The point of the exercise was to list all of the representative entries. We think there are about a dozen of them, but when we went to have a look, we could only find two of them. When we stumble across the others, we shall add them. The issue with the representative entries is that they don't meet notability criteria. There have been dozens of DNZ bios put up deletion, but they have all survived, and these representative entries wouldn't because they weren't added because the individuals are notable, but because they represent a part of the society that is worth writing about. Schwede66 18:13, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Could we at least find one representative that wasn't a prostitute, though? It looks like vandalism, without any context. What does it mean when one is called a prostitute and a character? Was she also a character in a novel or something? The other entry just says that the woman was a prostitute from Scotland. Surely, there are more representatives of NZ women than this. It almost looks insulting.--Bellerophon5685 (talk) 18:47, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

I've added another representative entry and this one's not a prostitute. Schwede66 05:12, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Is Frances Caverhill another representative entry? I don't have time to look into it so will park this here. User:Chocmilk03, you might have an opinion on the matter. Schwede66 00:26, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Here's another candidate: Eileen Savell Schwede66 17:00, 26 September 2022 (UTC)