Talk:Gail Trimble/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Apparently University Challenge's cleverest contestant according to this article so worth a redirect I think. TheRetroGuy (talk) 18:33, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Bad form describing Gail as "the female Stephen Fry", surely she's a mite smarter than he is, or does he just hide it? --Damorbel (talk) 21:05, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm guessing you've never watch the University Challenge episode that Fry was on? He showed that he is an immensely clever man and quite a fair bit of the information of Qi comes from him and not the cue cards Uksam88 (talk) 18:32, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Has anyone whose opinions are notable actually criticised Gail Trimble? There's a lot of "reaction" to supposed criticism, but it seems to me that it's all just lashing out at phantoms. The coverage has been overwhelmingly positive, give or take a few nobodies on internet forums. And frankly, who gives a toss what they think? (says an anon IP, yeah yeah, I know, OK?...) --212.139.88.49 (talk) 14:36, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Well I don't think the rules here extend to Facebook's. But I think they're referring to this kind of thing

Gail Trimble it's got nothing to do with being a woman so shut the **** up - http://www.facebook.com/s.php?q=Gail+Trimble&init=q&sid=5d630e892a81f93e95653fabe722bc19#/group.php?sid=5d630e892a81f93e95653fabe722bc19&gid=58107577325

I hate Corpus Christi uni challenge team ESPECIALLY Gail Trimble - http://www.facebook.com/s.php?q=Gail+Trimble&init=q&sid=5d630e892a81f93e95653fabe722bc19#/group.php?sid=5d630e892a81f93e95653fabe722bc19&gid=55515636178

- bingo99

It's a bit of a tricky one this, because the notable under Wikipedia rules are responding to the non-notable under Wikipedia rules. Famous person responds to forums and Facebooks, forums and Facebooks can't be cited, but famous people can. You see the problem? - bingo99

I agree it's just a case of commentators "giving a toss" about a few (or perhaps more than a few) nobodies on forums. Similar to the incident regarding a one-armed BBC children's presenter recently (forgotten her name), in which the media "defended" her against a handful of complaints from a few idiots. bridies (talk) 09:26, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Her name is Cerrie Burnell, and she has a page here as well! Ronhjones (talk) 18:21, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

The criticism and reaction section are a large part of the problem since the section gives undue weight to the flurry of media attention that she is now receiving. When we write about a topic immediately after an event we are not able to frame the incident so that we give it an accurate proportion of detail in contrast to the rest of the life events. This is especially true if the person is young or the the person is only known for the one event. For this reason, it is best to eliminate criticism and reaction sections and keep media responses about her to a bare minimum if we include them at all. FloNight♥♥♥ 22:29, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

In this case, a good part of Trimble's noteworthiness relates to the scale and nature of the media reaction and criticism itself. It is not a "problem" to refer to that in this article. Initially, the discussion focused on Trimble, specifically, and it is therefore appropriate that it be covered in this article, rather than in a wider UC article. It would be overly pedantic at this point to rename the article, or to generate a new article along the lines of "Reactions to Gail Trimble's appearances on UC...", or whatever. See my comment above - if, in a few months time, it is apparent that Trimble herself has not maintained personal notability in WP terms, the content, including the information on the media reaction, could in my view be merged into the University Challenge 2009 article. Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:41, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Nonsense (FN) - just now they are the point of the article, & rightly take up a good deal of it. As her life continues more can be added. Johnbod (talk) 23:53, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually it is a problem. The content used for for an encyclopedia article is different than content used for other types of writing. Wikipedia is not a blog, op ed page, tabloid, or a place for investigative journalism or human interest stories. The construction of articles should reflect that we are writing an encyclopedia entry. Look at the articles that are Good Articles or Feature Articles to see the style and tone of the entries. Overemphasis of media reaction shows undue weight about this event in her life. Soon the newspapers and blogs will move on to discussing another hot topic and Trimble will move on with her life but our article will not reflect it if we overemphasis this event and media reaction in her article. FloNight♥♥♥ 00:00, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh, you're telling me about FAs etc? Johnbod (talk) 00:15, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

...would someone who knows their stuff care to start an article on Sarah Fitzpatrick, the Gail Trimble of 1998? --81.170.36.250 (talk) 22:46, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

I've created a redirect to University Challenge. If she's notable enough then someone can start an article about her. I might Google her in the morning if someone doesn't beat me to it. TheRetroGuy (talk) 00:13, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

ok, I did it this evening instead, and she appears to have a few mentions, but let's not turn this into a request page for articles on other past University Challenge contestants. TheRetroGuy (talk) 00:22, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Interesting to see Gail Trimble compared with Wikipedia : "They were hungry for a sign of weakness - desperate to see the brainbox they call the “human Google” reduced to something slightly more fallible - maybe a “human Wikipedia”.". Ten points to Trimble, I reckon. :) Colonel Warden (talk) 15:08, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

And where are our bonus questions?? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:29, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

As there are separate articles on University Challenge and University_Challenge_2009, would it not be preferable for the merge template to refer to the latter?

It might be of interest to readers to know that Gail Trimble has attracted a fan club on the social networking website Facebook. I shall leave other Wikipedians to decide whether this is interesting and informative enough to be included in this article. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 22:35, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

It's not. --Ali'i 13:47, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

It would be nice if this article included the subject of Gail Trimble's D. Phil. research. I believe it is on Catullus.If any one can find a reliable source for this (including any web-based sources), it would be good if this information were added to this article. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 20:13, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

It's already there! But I see she has been cited already [1] Johnbod (talk) 20:28, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually, all the "Background" section said was that she lectured on Catullus. It did not clarify how her D. Phil. is on Catullus. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 17:31, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I have now put in the information which states that Trimble's D. Phil. is on Catullus, and many thanks to the kind Wikipedian who made my style more academic there. If you want to know a source for this, you can go to the website of the "Church Times" (www.churchtimes.co.uk). It should be possible there to find the section that says that Dr. Maltby says that Trimble now needs to complete her thesis on Catullus. Perhaps this website could be added to the article as the source of this information. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 19:49, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

This page is getting attention at the editathon at the Institute of Classical Studies. Some of the attendees know Gail and her work. They are getting training and familiarity with Wikipedia to address the gender gap in our coverage of women classicists. Watch this space... Andrew D. (talk) 14:30, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

On Friday 1 September 2017, Gail Trimble appeared on Only Connect with her husband Tom West and her brother Hugh Trimble, acting as captain of a team called "The Meeples". This information could go in the article somewhere, but I am not sure where best to put it. Vorbee (talk) 20:04, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

This has been added. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:16, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

On the website www.trinity.ox.uk/people-profiles/Gail_Trimble, Gail Trimble says that she supervises postgraduates looking at Latin literature and its reception. This could go in the section on her career. Vorbee (talk) 16:29, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Is this notable? A very large proportion of academics in UK universities supervise postgraduates as a normal part of their job. Where will it stop? Reporting that person X sharpens pencils or uses a word processor? 86.153.162.0 (talk) 08:51, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Could this article be added to the category "Classical Scholars of the University of Oxford"?Vorbee (talk) 21:45, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

The section on Trimble's personal life gives the date when she became engaged to Tom West. Should it now say that they are now married (modifying the text to point this out should not prove too difficult)?Vorbee (talk) 19:45, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Have now added with a source. They married in August 2020. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:40, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Since Gail Trimble's first claim to fame was her successful appearance on University Challenge, should this not be added to the category called "University Challenge"?Vorbee (talk) 17:53, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Not sure, like Gail, both Eric and Bobby get only Category:Contestants on University Challenge. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:25, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

The article can now point out that she appeared on In Our Time on January 9 2020, on the programme about Catullus. Vorbee (talk) 09:09, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

I have now added that. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:22, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

I believe the appeal to the proposed deletion has now been closed, with the result of the discussion been to keep this article, so should the "Deletion discussion has been appealed" tag now be removed? ACEOREVIVED (talk) 22:29, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes I think it can be removed now as the discussion is closed. The merger discussion seems to have fizzled out as well, but I'll leave the merge template in for now in case anyone else wants to have their say. TheRetroGuy (talk) 23:34, 12 March 2009 (UTC)