Talk:Sarah Kendzior#Image

The assertion by User: Bueller 007 in the change-log (when notability template was inserted) that "there's really nothing in this article establishing her notability" seems absurd. There's this article by Helen Jung in Cosmopolitan:

• {{cite news |last1=Jung |first1=Helin |title=How I Became a Political Journalist Working in the Middle of the Country |url=https://www.cosmopolitan.com/career/a8578596/sarah-kendzior-political-journalist-get-that-life/ |accessdate=20 January 2019 |work=Cosmopolitan |date=30 January 2017}}

The by-line of the article is not Kendzior, and she is clearly the focus of the nontrivial coverage in the article (which uses her voice but is not under her byline). And there's no evidence that Cosmopolitan fails to be "independent" of her. A prominent magazine such as Cosmopolitan does profile just anybody, just any non-notable person, the way they did for Kendzior. --Presearch (talk) 19:36, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

:Furthermore, in the St. Louis Public Radio KWMU-1 interview with Don Marsh cited as

:*{{Cite news |url=http://news.stlpublicradio.org/post/st-louis-journalist-sarah-kendzior-conversation-don-marsh|title=St. Louis journalist Sarah Kendzior in conversation with Don Marsh |last=Heuer |first=Alex|access-date=2018-07-16 |language=en}}

:Marsh in the first minutes states in his opening words that "Saint Lous journalist Sarah Kendzior has become something of a media sensation in recent years," and a few seconds later, recounts that in the pre-recorded interview, "I began by asking how she explains her relatively sudden national celebrity". Again, it's clear that there is non-trivial focus on the individual who is the focus of this Wikipedia article.

:Unless I hear meaningful counter-arguments, in a few days I anticipate I will remove the notability template (although it would still be good for others to further expand the article). --Presearch (talk) 19:49, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

I added a date of birth based on Kendzior being the source of A Thought for the Day on A Word A Day (see citation in infobox and [https://wordsmith.org/words/pot-valor.html here]). That daily newsletter and website takes a quote from someone whose birthday it is. If there is a better source, I hope someone will find it. --Prairieplant (talk) 07:42, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Her own book is a better source, but it’s not exact. She’s clear in this book (her most recent) about where she lives. --2600:6C40:7400:1D7C:2CF5:A276:2500:C945 (talk) 11:55, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

:Thanks but I removed the birth date. Per WP:BLP, a good reliable source is needed for such details. Someones thoughts on a word for the day are irrelevant for this kind of thing, and the claim about the book is challenged by conflicting data. You might quote the text from the book so others can perhaps find it in a Google search. Johnuniq (talk) 05:25, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

“... claim about the book is challenged by conflicting data”? What does this refer to? What data? Is a to-the-sentence citation of her book about her own birthday a reliable source? --2600:6C40:7400:1D7C:A1C3:4DE3:BEB2:66D5 (talk) 20:43, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

This reads like an extended press release, if not love letter to its subject. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.182.132.165 (talk) 04:31, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

@Ckoerner: Where did the subject request that the image of her should be taken down? I couldn't find anything on this article's talk page or version history, nor on the talk page of the image or a post on social media.

If that's true, we should also add a comment for editors in the infobox as without such a comment it's only a matter of time when users will reinsert the image again. Maxeto0910 (talk) 08:34, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

:She reached out to me privately. A comment in the info box is a good idea. Ckoerner (talk) 09:13, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

: On the plus side, there's 31403 frames in that CC-BY-licensed video, most of which feature the subject of this article. So we can either choose another, or upload the whole thing to the Commons and use it. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 09:23, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

::That’s not the plus side you might think it is. The subject of the article has made it clear that she does not wish for any frames from that presentation to be used. In fact, as a writer, she said she wishes there was no photo of her on Wikipedia. If my word isn’t sufficient, I’m happy to ask her to email VRTS, although that seems like an exceptionally unnecessary step. Ckoerner (talk) 11:10, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

:::Your friend can submit a picture of herself if she doesn't like the one being used. Buffalkill (talk) 21:11, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

::::Read my comment again please. Ckoerner (talk) 12:30, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

I don't see any valid reason to not have a picture. Valid reasons could be those related to {{xt|privacy, defamation, improper context, licensing, or picture quality.}} In this case:

• the subject is decidedly a WP:PUBLICFIGURE
• there is an appropriately licensed picture in the commons
• the picture was taken in the proper context of her work
• the subject can submit a picture of herself if she doesn't like the one being used.

Buffalkill (talk) 20:30, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

:The following links may be helpful (not in any particular order):

:*Wikipedia:FAQ/Article subjects

:*Wikipedia:Contact us/Article subjects

:*Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Help

:*Wikipedia:Notable person survival kit

:*Wikipedia:A picture of you

:*Wikipedia:Conflict of interest

:*Wikipedia:Requests for oversight

:*Template:Edit COI

:*Commons:Photographs of identifiable people

:*WT:BLP#quick question about photos (contemporaneous policy discussion)

:*WP:LUC

:*WP:OWN

:Buffalkill (talk) 20:31, 12 June 2025 (UTC)