Talk:Carl Randall

Clean up

There was no explanation for the COI tag so I think it is fair for the author (or anyone else) to remove it. I can't see any evidence on Wikipedia of COI, so I supposing the COI was speculative (or based on off-Wiki investigation, whch is a no-no). However, the sourcing is not great and the article is bordering on promotional. I've removed most of the unsourced personal family information. The date of birth and birth name also needs a good source. Sionk (talk) 14:37, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

My concerns about a possible conflict of interest were based on the fact that the article was created and extensively edited by an editor called "Hawkeye press" (name subsequently changed to "HawkeyeJapan"), which coincidentally was the same as the name of the publisher of the book Japan Portraits mentioned in the article. Combined with the editor's apparent knowledge of intricate biographical details (birth date, birth place, birth name, etc.) not mentioned in any of the numerous sources, it all seemed rather obvious to me. But if the editor insists that there is no close connection or conflict of interest, I am willing to give him/her the benefit of the doubt on the proviso that they cooperate in improving the article so that it more closely resembles an encyclopedia article rather than a promotional piece from some magazine. --DAJF (talk) 23:31, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Fair points. Anyway, there are other clean-up templates that may address the issues more directly. Sionk (talk) 17:30, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Structure and citing

Leapnet, per WP:LEADFOLLOWSBODY, MOS:INFOBOX, WP:DOB, and various other guidelines, what I did was correct. His YOB is not cited, and the infobox and lead should only contain summary information of what is written and cited in the body. Please do not revert experienced editors' changes without discussing on the talk page, or you will run into trouble again. See WP:EDITWAR. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 23:24, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

Leapnet, please keep the discussion here and not on my talk page. You can WP:PING me if you need to attract my attention, but as the talk page is on my watch list, I get notified anyway. If you follow the links provided above, you will understand the need for the repetition. The infobox is just a quick ref summary, and in general doesn't contain citations. Any alternative names are always cited in the first sentence, and any significant ones have redirects targeting the article. The lead roughly summarises the body, or contains its most important points. The body is where the information about the topic is fleshed out, and, most importantly, contains the citations. I hope this is clear now? I reinstated my version that includes this layout, and then reinstated your lead, which I clobbered in the process by mistake. I have also placed a welcome panel on your own talk page for you to learn more about editing Wikpedia. I also find WP:BETTER a good reference guide. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 23:30, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the info. My concern isnt that its mentioned, its that its mentioned repeatedly, and by doing so, doesnt improve the article. I had just deleted the info again from the lead, when saw your new message here, and so I just undid it (to reinstate your info). I have looked at other similar articles, and not all of them mention such info in the lead, and still dont think it needs to be mentioned in an opening summary. However, I shall leave the lead as you did. I have however adapted the section after that, deleting the repetitive info in question and changing the header. This improves things and solves the problem. Just mentioning his birth name isnt enough to justify an 'early life' section. Perhaps if someone added more info about this, the birth name may be included as part of it, but as it is, its the only thing about early life, and not enough to justify it. By only having an 'eduction section' now, it solves this problem, and also solves the ongoing problem of unnecessary repetition. Leapnet (talk) 10:42, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Please reinstate my version. You have not understood WP:LEADFOLLOWSBODY or what I have written above. References do not belong in the lead. Early life and education is a standard heading for bios. Articles are in a process of continual improvement and growth and you should not base your decisions om articles that don't follow the manual of style. Your editing is now bordering on disruptive. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 11:37, 24 December 2025 (UTC)