Oh no doubt. I’m not saying people should be solely responsible for maintaining they’re own wiki pages. Just that I can understand why they would get upset if they think the info is inaccurate since misinformation so easily becomes and remains the truth.
Well I first thought about writing that as “minor academic / artist / yogi”, but then thought otherwise. To me she is not well known and I’m not able to judge her renown in the art field or as a yogi.
her background and yoga practices are actually relevant
Maybe (although Wikipedians don’t think so), but at what level? Could her Yoga practice be covered in general article with a simple “She practices yoga”? Also: “Se is black”. Although apparently she retired from being black in 2012?
She’s well known enough to show up in contemporary art textbooks.
Well, the information and level of specificity in her own bio is going to be different than what’s appropriate for the Wikipedia page - the full details of her yoga practice aren’t necessary, certainly, but just saying “she is black” is far too reductive, given she’s trying to have a far more nuanced exploration of the issue.
1 Like
Thanks Andrea for your bio; I learned a lot about the woman behind the bylines of the posts I read.
3 Likes
Once you have your own site with a correct bio, you can correct Wikipedia.
The Cabal hates all information that is not rehashed from somewhere else.
Thus, the declining value of wikipedia entries; anything posted recently is already fairly trivially available elsewhere.
I dunno. She’s pretty notable for discussing race and identity. She’s on the front page of the NY Times Magazine today.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
