Talk:Alice T. Days

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Arts and Entertainment

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Women artists

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women artists, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women artists on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women artistsWikipedia:WikiProject Women artistsTemplate:WikiProject Women artistsWomen artists articles
	An editor has requested a photograph or image to be included in this article to improve its quality.

Women writers Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	It is requested that a photograph be added to this article to improve its quality.

New York (state) Low‑importance

	New York (state) portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York (state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York (state)Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (state)Template:WikiProject New York (state)New York (state) articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Issues with copyright violations and promotional tones

I'm going through this and cleaning out the copyright violations and promotional tones. Closely paraphrasing is still considered to be a copyright violation on Wikipedia and the marriage section was taken almost verbatim from this website. I also need to add that you should not be using primary sources as the main/sole source to back up claims. While I doubt that Day would misrepresent herself or her work, other people have and because of this you need to be able to back up any of the claims with an independent and reliable source. This will not only back up the claims, but it will also help to show that the claims are notable enough to be included in an article about Day.

I also had to heavily edit the section for the documentary. Try not to use terms like "prestigious" since they can be seen as WP:WEASEL words and come across as promotional. I also have to question the inclusion of the material about the people who put together the trailer. While putting a trailer together is not an easy task, this is usually not seen as something notable enough to include in an article unless the trailer release garnered a large amount of coverage. The way it was phrased also made it a little confusing as to who actually made the documentary itself as it came across like the students were the main driving force behind the film rather than the Days. Here's the sentence that specifically gives off this impression:

Dan and Alex, the two students of the university then took the rough treatment of the ideas for the film created by Alice and Lincoln, on the environmental damage of warfare and turned it into the 68-minute documentary, Scarred Lands and Wounded Lives: The Environmental Footprint of War.

This sentence gives off the impression that the Days made a separate film and that the people who made the documentary were actually the two students, who based their work on an earlier work by the Days. If this is the case then the documentary may not actually give notability to Day herself.

I've expanded more on these topics at the draft copy at Draft talk:Alice T Days. I'm going to try to re-write this, so please do not re-add copyrighted information or unsourced information. I understand that this is for a school project but right now what is being posted is not beneficial to Wikipedia. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:09, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I also have to remove some of the awards. The article claims that it won Best Documentary at the 2008 California Independent Film Festival, however the website for the festival actually states that Race to Execution won this award. It's likely that this was a nomination rather than an award win, which is why it's so incredibly important to perform the research and find other sources that discuss the topic. Days's website just lists the award, but doesn't explicitly state if it won or not. This isn't her trying to be deceptive - it's common practice for filmmakers to list award nominations on their website since it makes them look good. Some will say it was a nomination and not a win, some won't. Again, this is why it's necessary to perform the research and not rely solely on primary sources because it's very, very easy to misinterpret primary sources because they represent things a certain way. They might not mean to mislead - most don't - but it can still be misinterpreted. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:25, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I do need to elaborate slightly here. You can use the film festival website to back the claims of award wins up, since that would be official enough to confirm the award win. However the act of winning an award does not always confer notability - you need to be able to establish that the festival and the award are notable by showing where places other than the filmmakers and the festival have covered the awards. This is usually done by multiple reliable sources (newspapers, film news websites, etc) writing about the festival and reposting the list of award winners. Just be careful about this as not every source is a reliable one. So far I'm not seeing a huge amount of coverage for the awards, so while we will be able to confirm some of the awards, that does not mean that they're automatically notable. However there's also no harm in including the information and at this point I've provided enough sourcing to show that Days is notable, as I've found reviews of her work in academic journals. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:33, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Another thing to point out: be very, very careful of press releases. These are considered primary sources that come from Days herself and are not the equivalent of having the information posted on the film festival website/release. If I can't find something in the news or on the official festival pages, I'm going to remove the awards. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:35, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Just found that one of the awards was given out during a different year. This is another thing to be careful of. The reason why I'm harping on this so strongly is that writing an article with errors and copyright violations undermines the integrity of the site as a whole, the writer themselves, and the person/topic they're writing about. I don't mean this to come across so harshly, but this is why it's so very, very important to research things carefully, whether it's for an encyclopedia article or any other type of document. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:44, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm removing the CINE Golden Eagle Award claim for now, until I can find something to back this up other than the film website itself. We need to be able to know which one it won, since there are multiple categories, for professionals and students. If they had students taking part in the documentary then it could very well have qualified for the student one. I'm finding mention of the award on websites of people that represent the filmmakers and the film, but not anything on the CINE website itself. Until recently they held two cycles a year so it's also important to know which cycle they won. If we could find a way to contact them and get this information, that would be helpful. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:59, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have to warn you: please do not repost the information to the article. I'm leaving the history here intact for now, but if it is reverted I will delete the history to deter further attempts to re-add copyrighted and promotional material. Information can be added if you write it in your own words in a neutral, encyclopedic fashion with sourcing to back it up, though. But I have to stress that it must be sourced, preferably by something other than an official biography or other WP:PRIMARY source. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:27, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested Draft

I did do a draft first and submitted it first and then Tokyogirl79 accused me of copying the existing article which was my draft version only published as a full article. So I guess I published the article and draft at the same time and got accused of copying the same article when they were the same article both written by me. VanceScarlett (talk) 10:47, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Day or Days ?

The article title is Alice T. Days but throughout the subject is also referred to as Day, which is also used in the references. If there is a reason for this or is some copy editing required ?14GTR (talk) 20:23, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]