Talk:Danitra Vance

Changes to Danitra Vance Article

I removed some of the most recent additions...Please note that, while it was all solid information about the show, this is an article ON Danitra and should stay within that scope. The information provided would be great information to add to the SNL article about that season. I am not trying to "revert" back to my previous version, and I did add that her departure was on her terms and that she was not fired. Thanks. NickBurns 20:03, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Changed The Birth Year

I changed it from 1959 to 1954, because the "Social Security Death Index" has 1954 as her birth year. Plus, the article states she graduated high school in 1972, but she'd have been 13 years old then, and that doesn't make sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.205.204.136 (talk) 06:39, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

GA prep

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	to do: hit up WP:GOCE
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	check once done
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	need citations for some of the SNL stuff and the other work - google titles + name. why is this worded like this?
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.	may have to check the episode bits
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	run through earwig
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	yes
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	guess I'll find out in the review
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	check once done
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	add caption
	7. Overall assessment.

Beginning prep for GA nom. originalmess^{how u doin that busta rhyme?} 05:23, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Confusion in lede

The lede contains the sentence "[Vance was] the first openly LGBT member, though she was not openly out.". It is not clear what the distinction being made her is. Can someone clarify? If she it openly LGBT, it seems like she would be 'out'. 85.149.13.48 (talk) 19:20, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

I was coming here to say the same thing. My guess is that the person who wrote that sentence meant to say simply "the first LGBT member, though she was not out." 'Openly out' is redundant, and 'openly LGBT+ but not out' an oxymoron. There's a citation further down that does state "she was not out publicly during her lifetime," so I'm going to edit appropriately with that reference.HarashoEli (talk) 19:50, 28 March 2021 (UTC)