Talk:Leslie Hoffman

FA Nomination (Mar 2009, Successful)

 * From Memory Alpha:Nominations for featured articles.

Self nomination: After I've spent several days to expand this article and got no reply on the peer review site for two months I think it's time to nominate this article for a featured one. I've majorly expanded the article from a short one, including images from Ms. Hoffman herself and links, information about her life and of course about her Star Trek connection...and now here is the nomination. – Tom 12:27, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Support - very informative and well-written.– Cleanse 10:24, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. A few more opinions and support or oppose votes would be really helpful. – Tom 06:40, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Support - extraordinarily thorough and well-presented. --Connor Cabal 18:43, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Support-Leslie Hoffman I am most impressed with the article that Thomas has done. He is the best reseacher I have ever seen.  He digs for every piece of information and then verifies it.  Thank you Thomas for a wonderful article on myself but it is you who should be nominated for best reseacher/writer.
 * Oppose - seems more like a list than an article, per se, but I'm willing to forgive it that! I would be happy to support it, once my concern (as posted on the article's talk page) has been satisfactorily dealt with. Although I know it's a relatively minor flaw, my valid criticism has not been addressed at all, yet, and I don't think that nonsensical sentence is deserving of featured article status. --Defiant 19:09, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Support - an amazingly well-researched article that only seems a little like a list because of the pure abundance of facts available! Although I did have concerns, they were always only minimal, anyway. --Defiant 21:41, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Support. As always - top-notch research by Thomas. --Jörg 18:01, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Nomination successful, archived.– Cleanse 09:39, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Birthdate
Stuntrek removed her birthdate this am, which was listed as: It was changed simply to "21 January". Is there a reasoning behind this? Was the year incorrect? IMDb simply lists it as "19??". -- Sulfur 11:41, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * (born 21 January 19??; age ??)
 * She just didn't want it listed. Since we removed Todd Bryant's birth year at his request (and since it wasn't immediately available to the public), I see no reason not to extend the same courtesy to Ms. Hoffman. --From Andoria with Love 23:08, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I caught that a bit later on. It was early when I was checking that. :P -- Sulfur 01:07, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi all, I have been a Cave Woman and I have been in the 24th Century which means I could be old as "Flint" TOS. Stuntrek

Peer review
I've expanded the article and added some more appearances, images, Trek- related and non-related work, memories from Ms. Hoffman herself, and Star Trek connections. Please leave some comments how this article could be further improved or what should be corrected or changed. Thanks. – Tom 20:58, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

WBM
Site doesn't appear to have this anymore &mdash; Morder 14:58, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Making Sense of Nonsense
What does this sentence mean, "Hoffman recently helped her nephew, Ritchie Hoffman, to coordinate his first steps in the acting world and calls it excited "Hoffman: The Next Generation"."? It makes no grammatical sense and, if it is a quote, it should be cited. --Defiant 16:11, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I've missed your doubts here. Sorry. I've removed the sentence which is not necessary for the article IMO. I've tried to say what Ms. Hoffman tried to say here. – Tom 19:29, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi! I was wondering why my comment was being ignored - thanks for clearing that up! Maybe I should have originally posted on the nominations page, instead. I thought the sentence was a good way to conclude the article so I've made another attempt to describe it. When I made the above remark, I was just wondering whether the sentence meant what I thought it did, as it was a bit confusing. --Defiant 21:25, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the contribution. Really appreciated. Now the section looks better, definitly. As a non native English speaker its sometimes not easy to write what I want to write. Again, thanks. – Tom 21:28, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem; glad I could help! --Defiant 21:43, 11 April 2009 (UTC)