Talk:Wes DeMott

Oregon Low‑importance

	Oregon portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oregon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Oregon 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.OregonWikipedia:WikiProject OregonTemplate:WikiProject OregonOregon
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.
The current collaborations of the month are Women's History Month: Create or improve articles for women listed at Oregon Women of Achievement (modern) or Women of the West, Oregon chapter (historical).

Biography

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

notability established, but needs cleanup

Untitled

I checked google, and author is notable, multiple non-self-published titles. but it needs massive rewriting. one editor has done most of it, and i hope they can finish it. perhaps putting an "under construction" tag would be appropriate. im not going to try editing, at least yet. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 03:41, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

good work, but article still needs wikification. again, ill try to get to it some day, but compare this article to another author such as Dean Koontz,Raymond Khoury, or Stel Pavlou. ps i am very new at this myself.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 01:57, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

i just noticed the tags were removed, but the article is still primarily a resume in tone. i have removed some of the material, but left the rest for someone to reference. authors often refer to life events in interviews to explain their writing. i dont think the depth of material can be sustained for this (sorry for judgement here, nothing personal about it) less notable author. be bold and add the references! and please consider adding the tags back, under wikipedia guidelines. this could help others to notice it, and get the article rewritten faster. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 17:05, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

talking to myself here. i took out information not available on internet, added some formatting, etc. i dont think my original tags apply any more. again, any referenced info (interviews, etc) should be put in for notability sake.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 16:19, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]