Talk:Dasia Taylor

Good job so far. Everything you have appears to be neutral. Make sure to add sources to make the info more reliable. Your lead is very clear and makes it easy to know what the article will be about. Stay Spooky31 (talk) 18:36, 20 November 2024 (UTC) Reply

This article is a good start. Make sure to have citations and sources and check your grammar for mistakes. Your lead is amazing and a very neutral tone is present throughout your article. Good job! Cats4ever123 (talk) 22:30, 20 November 2024 (UTC) Reply

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 12 August 2024 and 20 December 2024. Further details are available on the course page . Student editor(s): GoldenApple001 , Cats4ever123 , Mangojangoboss (article contribs ). Peer reviewers: Nelliesmith123 , Marinaleee , Stay Spooky31 , StrangePerson321 , Swagalicious.15 , Flyingladybug , Shawn Combs , Peachycobbler , Madyloveswiki , Mcqueenk , CCC Student 1 .

— Assignment last updated by Brianda (Wiki Ed) (talk) 21:52, 20 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

We require far more than a few mentions in popular science magazines to demonstrate notability. Ldm1954 (talk) 08:56, 26 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

I disagree with this move to draft space. If you think the subject isn't notable, I would recommend you nominate the article for deletion at AFD. Otherwise, I'll return the article to mainspace where others can nominate it for deletion or improve it. Cheers, Suriname0 (talk) 23:57, 20 February 2025 (UTC) Reply

Many medical claims are made that are sourced to Dasia Taylor or the journalists who interviewed her (who presumably got it from her). Neither of which are medically educated (her current major is in political science, and even the most prestigious highschool science competitions hardly count as serious science). Example is the claim that "many sutures are covered in a material that changes it's electrical conductivity" and that this information is sent to doctors to alert them of infections. It is then claimed that it's widely used in the US. This is all false. I personally am not aware of such sutures existing in medical practice, more than likely what is being referenced is this proposal which is unlikely to be widespread given that it (and nearly all other related work) was only published in 2023, similar work seems to have only emerged in the 2010s so it probably still isn't widespread. If such sutures, even if just for the skin, did exist, it would actually be quite impractical since you would have to interact with the stitches themselves and you can tell if a wound on the skin is infected simply by looking at it. The article implies that this would somehow be transmitted to the doctor, when all proposals involve passing some sort of detector over the patient, or internal imaging. Building a transmitter with a power source into stitches is quite absurd.

Nearly all the information comes from uncritical, and arguably very sloppy, interviews of the subject. For instance in the Des Moines Register, VariegateHealth is described as a medical device company and it's implied that it manufactures her invention. Yet in the interview Taylor describes the entity as a STEM outreach project, with zero mention of development of her invention. Of note VariegateHealth, according to Taylor's LinkedIn, only ever had one employee (herself), and is apparently completely defunct.

Notability. The subject is notable for being reported as a scientist, an inventor, and a CEO. However, if you were to measure her notability with respect to each individual category she would clearly fail. Winning a highschool contest does not make you a scientist let alone a notable one, filing papers to make a corporation can make you a CEO but not a notable one, filing a patent can make you an inventor but if that invention is never adopted because it requires porous material that increases infection . . . then you aren't a notable inventor. JSory (talk) 12:19, 26 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Overall, Dasia Taylor has WP:SIGCOV across multiple WP:RS. In regards to her being a scientist, 8 of the current sources in her article use that word to refer to her. Just to cherry-pick a few:

• "Teenage scientist and inventor Dasia Taylor was born on..." (https://blackpast.org/african-american-history/dasia-taylor-2004/)
• "Stephanie Sy reports on one 17-year-old Iowa scientist who's working..." (https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/17-year-old-black-girl-makes-color-changing-sutures-that-detect-infection)
• "Dasia Taylor didn’t expect to become a nationally recognized scientist at 17 years old." (https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/17/us/student-beets-color-changing-sutures-wellness-trnd/index.html)

All of the citations in the article speak to her notability, and I feel that some of your arguments would be clarified by WP:NTEMP and/or WP:ARTN. CaptainAngus (talk) 17:02, 26 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

I'm not claiming that she wasn't notable, she was notable by the mere fact that media talked about her. In fact I found her article from media posts. She is however not notable as a scientist, inventor, or a CEO, and should not be called as such. Having a handful of journalists claiming that you are does not mean that anyone in that field considers you such. Keep in mind that the only reason she is nationally recognised is that a journalist thought that she was interesting, and then others caught on. Note that the actual winner of Taylor's competition that year, Yunseo Choi, didn't get any of the level of the attention that Taylor did, even though Choi (and two others) apparently was recognised much more highly by the contest. This is because the "national recognition" was simply media companies echoing the same story.

I don't believe that Taylor considers herself a scientist, she only seems to call herself an advocate, inventor and CEO. Apparently she is more humble than her wiki page.

As an aside, I don't think that blackpast article is credible. It claims that Taylor discovered that beets are sensitive to PH, even though this is actually a very common experiment for children to conduct. Taylor also doesn't seem to have ever done work with cotton, and I can't find any source on the Iowa-City Press-Citizen awarding her 25ドルK, it seems like a very odd thing for a media company to give financial awards for. JSory (talk) 15:35, 30 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Apparently the author of the blackpast article, somehow confused Press-Citizen reporting that she would receive at least 25ドルK from Regeneron, with Press-Citizen themselves giving it to her. A very poor article, and simply bad journalistic practice overall this case. JSory (talk) 15:51, 30 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Per MOS:ROLEBIO, "The lead sentence [of a biography] should describe the person as they are commonly described by reliable sources." There are 8 sources that call her a scientist. CaptainAngus (talk) 20:30, 1 August 2026 (UTC) Reply