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 sourcedmust 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.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
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 within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
The currently cited sources are all either primary or routine, and thus do not comprise a case for notability. Searching online, I did see some signs of additional coverage, and am left uncertain as to whether the subject meets WP:GNG or not. signed, Rosguilltalk00:26, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've added some additional sources (particularly in regards to TV appearances whilst at The Times, but also a few Sky News related things). Tvcameraop (talk) 11:36, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not really seeing any significant secondary coverage; the closest to such coverage would be this article that refers to "Sam Coates' fantastic scoop for Sky News", but provides no other information about Coates. signed, Rosguilltalk17:17, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I do get where you're coming from. I've added some more which improves the secondary coverage but whether it is significant or not is debatable. I was wondering how one should mention that articles by Coates have been "widely cited by peers" (per WP:JOURNALIST) without just saying "His work has been widely cited" and giving loads of otherwise random references? Tvcameraop (talk) 09:19, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
IMO, you shouldn't unless a secondary source has specifically said that (or an equivalent). Judgments of impact should be left to reliable secondary sources. Looking at as slew of publications and deciding that it's enough to say "widely cited" is original research. The one thing that would be more permissible would be to identify some of the top published articles of Coates' career and list those in a selected bibliography section. signed, Rosguilltalk17:40, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
