This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Screenwriters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of screenwriting, screenwriters, and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScreenwritersWikipedia:WikiProject ScreenwritersTemplate:WikiProject Screenwritersscreenwriter
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women
This article was created or improved during the following events hosted by the Women in Red project. The editor(s) involved may be new; please assume good faith regarding their contributions before making changes.Women in RedWikipedia:WikiProject Women in RedTemplate:WikiProject Women in RedWomen in Red
I've copyedited the article a bit to reduce some of the more "professional-profile-oriented" language. However the structure of this is still largely a LinkedIn profile, there's not a lot of meat on the bones. I am guessing this subject is notable, but this article does not give DUE weight to the notable aspects, and seems to give UNDUE weight to several CV line-items. I'll leave it here for now. —siroχo04:32, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I thought the 'meat' would be peacockery so tried to keep it on the low end. Now that you've edited it, I'll see what I can do to further improve it. Thanks for the feedback and the edits. UMStellify (talk) 17:04, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, yeah, it's a bit unfortunate the sourcing we currently have, and apologies if my comment came across as judgemental, in retrospect. I think the lack of better secondary coverage is probably a symptom of the same problem being addressed by Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/279 as linked on this talk page.
My main goal with the edits was to reduce the "worked on a project for a company" aspect of the article. Even if verifiable and true, they may unintentionally distract from the aspects of this biography that make the subject notable.
If you can find any quotes from reliable sources, (especially from ones that don't feature interviews), even if they sound like peacocking, the attributed quotes could help provide the critical reaction to provide necessary context and highlight the notable aspects, if not given UNDUE weight. —siroχo19:59, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, no worries! But I'm looking for better secondary coverage and quotes. Here's what I've found so far:
MBC Group CEO Sam Barnett said the company was “incredibly excited” by the appointment. “Christina brings with her a wealth of international expertise in content development and production where she has worked across a multitude of territories and languages, and led on the development of Emmy and Golden Globe award-winning series,” he said.
Wow, thanks! Here's my initial takes on a couple of those sources.
The Edgerton Mad Men source is excellent. In this context, I think you can paraphrase the idea, and anywhere you're not sure just attribute to Edgerton. The whole of the coverage is secondary synthesis, even if it includes direct quotes. In that first chapter it's pretty clear the Edgerton is saying Christina Wayne was instrumental in getting the Mad Men pilot made as part of a larger move for AMC to develop programming influenced by HBO. There's also a possibly cite-able bit in the second chapter in an interview between Brian Rose and Scott Hornbacher that gives a lot of credit to Wayne for the production of the pilot. A little more care needed, because that second chapter seems to be all primary sourcing from an interview done freshly for the Edgerton book.
The Sepinwall The Revolution Was Televised source is pretty good. It walks the line between secondary snythesis and primary sourcing, similar to some of the news articles, but it's a bit more on the secondary side. We'll have to be cautious to not just let Wayne speak to our readers through Sepinwall and our article, but I think a bit of summary from that source is mertied. It also seems to cover both Mad Men and Breaking Bad to some degree, so that's great as it's the main of the subject's main claims to notability.
The W magazine source is good but it will be even trickier to not give the subject UNDUE representation of themself, because the quotes are primary in such a source. It could provide some reinforcement. Perhaps start by referencing the secondary coverage you have above, and then reinforce with "Christina Wayne herself says she was influenced by HBO" or something, referencing W. There may be some other attributable stuff from others in that piece as well.
The problem with the MBC Group CEO quote is that it's very much trying to play up their "big new flashy hire". It's so clearly biased that any amount of inclusion would probably be biased, even if fully attributed and dripping in context. I could be proven wrong, but I'm hesitant to rely on such a quote.
This is great feedback. Also, I wasn't exactly looking at the sources for any of the articles I was writing in this way. I think I will revisit the lot of them to see how they can potentially be improved. Thank you so much.
As for Wayne's article, if it's okay with you, I'll draft the changes and post them here for review before taking them to the live space. I've got a couple of busy days ahead of me, but I'll get to it soon.
