This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Robert Stroud article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 365 days |
Robert Stroud was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Delisted good article |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org |
In the penultimate section "Truth versus Fiction" is the quote "...Stroud was also known to write pornographic fiction, much of it perversely involving children. These surviving documents point to the fact that Stroud was at least a latent pedophile...." I'm not comfortable characterizing someone based on their fictional writings. I doubt that horror writers, for example, are especially violent or morbid. Moreover, in the previous sentence is "...much of it perversely involving children." The term "perversely" seems too opinionated, or maybe I'm thinking too journalistically.
To whomever maintains this article, I'd recommend excising the entire sentence containing the first quote and the word "perversely" from the second. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.155.49.130 (talk) 17:21, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
Does the literature on Stroud contain any information on what happened to Kitty O'Brien after his arrest? When did she die?
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Uncited statements in the article and it has been tagged with an "additional citations for verification" banner since 2019. Z1720 (talk) 15:04, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
I have tagged this article as having multiple issues with lead section. Guideline WP:LEAD, at WP:LEADLENGTH indicate a good article should have a lead section of no more than 4 paragraphs or about 300 words. This article's lead section has extra information that is not included in the body of the article. resulting in the lead extending to 6 paragraphs. So I added the clean-up tag ((Lead extra info)). Based on MOS:LEAD, the lead section should introduce and summarize an article, without being too verbose or detailed. The fifth paragraph, which is about subject's role the Battle of Alcatraz could be summarized in a sentence. Stroud's role, whether the real account, or an over-dramatized fictionalized movie version is not covered elsewhere in either this article or the one about the battle. This makes this biographical coverage appear inaccurate, which is worse than totally omitting it, because its presence teases the reader and raises their expectations about the full article only to be disappointed by the absence of further coverage. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 00:28, 10 September 2023 (UTC)