User:Joseywales1961/NPP School/PlanetJuice

This programme of training is closed due to inactivity Josey Wales ^Parley 22:24, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

---

Hello PlanetJuice, welcome to your New Page Patrol School page! Every person I instruct will have their own page on which I will give them support and tasks to be completed. Please make sure you have this page added to your watchlist. Your NPP School page has been designed with you in mind and there is no reasonable time limit to complete the tasks - please be as specific as possible when asking questions, so that I know the best way to help you (and do not be afraid to let me know if you think something isn't working). Remember you are not under any obligation to complete this training and if you wish to discontinue with it at any time please just let me know. I hope you enjoy your time on this programme and wish you the very best of luck! Josey Wales ^Parley 08:01, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

How to use this page

This page will be built up over your time in the School, with new sections being added as you complete old ones. Each section will end with a task, written in bold type - this might be just a question, or it might require you to go and do something. You can answer a question by typing the answer below the task; if you have to do something, you will need to provide diffs to demonstrate that you have completed the task. Some sections will have more than one task, sometimes additional tasks may be added to a section as you complete them.

Please always sign your responses to tasks as you would on a talk page.

Communication

As Wikipedia users come from every corner of the globe, I should let you know that my time zone is Irish Summer Time (UTC+1) and the best time to get me would usually be 8pm-11pm my time, on weekdays. We should communicate only on this page and it's talk page in order to avoid having conversations and questions/answers all over the place.

Duration of tution

If both the instructor and student make completing the course curriculum a top priority, it will generally take around a month to go through the entirety of the curriculum. This pace is not required or necessarily expected, but rather is provided in order to give participants an idea of what to expect.

Abandoning tuition

In order to offer training to as many potential New Page Reviewers as possible, if the student hasn't edited this page or contacted me for a period of one month I will close the programme of training as presumed abandoned - however, you may at any time in next three months ask to resume where you left off. After four months of inactivity the page will be permanently closed.

Preliminary Task

Make sure you read through Wikipedia:Notability as that's the knowledge base around which most of the questions and tasks you do will revolve around.

Q. Please confirm under here when you have read the above and I will then post some questions for you to complete in your own time. Josey Wales ^Parley 08:01, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

A. I've read the notability guideline. —⁠PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 02:26, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

Notability

Extended content

PART 1 Questions Question 1 In your own words, how is notability defined on Wikipedia? Notability is a concept that helps editors determine whether a given topic may warrant a standalone article (something could be notable, but still be better placed in an existing article). Notability is merely a guideline, but it is a necessary one because it provides a useful test to determine whether an article is likely to meet core content policies, including verifiability, which is required. As such, the primary test for notability relies on finding multiple independent, reliable, secondary sources that provide significant coverage of the topic. If those sources don't exist, the article's content either won't be verifiable at all, or there will be so little verifiable, neutral, non-promotional content that it would be inappropriate and illogical for our readers to have a standalone article. Some topics have subject-specific notability guidelines that provide tailored criteria for a specific group of topics, but at the end of the day, those criteria are only presumptions, and there still must be sourcing to back up any claims in a potential article. Secondary to those content policy goals, notability also ensures that there is a minimum standard of inclusion for topics, so that things which are specifically excluded from Wikipedia don't make their way in. For example, WP:NEVENT clarifies that news coverage of routine events, such as traffic crashes, is not "significant" for notability purposes unless there is something that otherwise justifies inclusion. Having a minimum standard ensures that we don't become an indiscriminate collection of information that is verifiable, but not likely to be significant or overly useful to our readers. —⁠PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 18:04, 12 August 2023 (UTC) Y that's a very comprehensive answer Josey Wales Parley 19:36, 13 August 2023 (UTC) Question 2 Would step by step instructions on how to "Change a car tyre" be considered a notable topic in Wikipedia? Why or why not? Probably not. WP:NOTHOWTO specifically mentions "instruction manuals", which is more or less what is being described here. Even though significant coverage and reliable sourcing might exist, the notability guideline specifically excludes topics under WP:NOT from inclusion. If the topic were modified from "step by step instructions" to "general, encyclopedic information about changing tires", the topic might become notable depending on sourcing. Still, per WP:NOPAGE, it is likely that a standalone page would not be warranted because it might not be organizationally sound to have a separate page about changing tires without the proper context best provided by Tire (or a similar page). —⁠PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 18:04, 12 August 2023 (UTC) Y Josey Wales Parley 19:36, 13 August 2023 (UTC) Question 3 What are the differences between the WP:GNG and the subject-specific notability guidelines? How do we determine which one to use when patrolling an article? Both GNG and the SNGs have the same core goal: to help editors determine whether a topic is likely to warrant inclusion based on whether it can fall within the purposes of the encyclopedia (i.e. not WP:NOT) and meet core content policies. Both are only guidelines, and they both only create presumptions of a standalone article being warranted. That is, editors might determine that even notable topics may be best left unincluded altogether or included elsewhere. GNG is a broad guideline applicable to any topic. If an article meets GNG (when also considering any clarifications or restrictions about SIGCOV or acceptable sourcing provided by relevant SNGs), it is notable. SNGs can be used for certain topics either in conjunction with GNG (as just mentioned) or as a standalone means of determining notability. For example, in some cases, other types of sources can be used in place of secondary sources for establishing notability of academics. This would fail GNG, but an article can still be written because verifiable information exists and the SNG indicates that the topic meets a minimum standard of inclusion. —⁠PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 18:04, 12 August 2023 (UTC) Y yes, that's about it! Josey Wales Parley 19:36, 13 August 2023 (UTC) Subject-specific notability guidelines 1. Please categorize the subject-specific notability guidelines (listed at WP:SNG) into the following three categories a. Primarily additional criteria that are likely to indicate notability b. Primarily additional considerations that define or restrict the nature of coverage or sources required c. Even mix of the previous two categories Astronomical objects (although there are some additional restrictions on what constitutes significant coverage) Books Films Geographic features (although there are some restrictions on certain types of sources, like maps) Music People Sports (although there are a few comments on the suitability of sports-related sites for sourcing requirements) —⁠PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 21:17, 12 August 2023 (UTC) Events (although there are a few generic criteria (WP:EVENTCRIT) indicated as well) Numbers (a few additional criteria such as "interesting mathematical properties" exist, but mostly involves the presence of numbers in sources) Organizations and companies (a few additional criteria like those for noncommercial organizations exist, but mostly discusses properties of sources) —⁠PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 21:17, 12 August 2023 (UTC) Academics Web (defines web-related trivial coverage and an additional criterion met by winning an award) —⁠PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 21:17, 12 August 2023 (UTC) Y Some put music under category C, but I would say it's a toss-up Josey Wales Parley 19:36, 13 August 2023 (UTC) 2. Virtually all SNGs that provide additional notability criteria specify that these criteria may indicate that the subject meets notability guidelines. How would you interpret this caveat as a new page reviewer? A lot of the SNGs provide presumptions of notability based on verifiable traits of a topic. These presumptions are intended to reflect that, in most cases, having such a trait indicates that it is likely that appropriate sourcing exists to (a) support a claim of importance and (b) provide enough information to write a balanced, verifiable article. This is not always the case, though. For example, WP:NPOL specifies that state legislators are presumed to be notable. It is possible that a state legislator (or legislator-elect) might not have attracted significant coverage as described in WP:NBASIC. In this case, per WP:BIOSPECIAL, an article may not be appropriate if it would be difficult to write any meaningful amount while still ensuring verifiability. (If the only meaningful coverage is "Legislator X won election Y 56% to 44%", that's better covered in an article on the election.) The same can be said about other situations covered by other SNGs. —⁠PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 18:04, 12 August 2023 (UTC) Y Yes, for example, for many years we had the now defunct NFOOTY (soccer) that basically said if a player made 1 appearance in a first class game in a fully profresssional league he/she would be notable, which led to a raft of stubs on otherwise non-notable players Josey Wales Parley 19:36, 13 August 2023 (UTC) Scenarios For scenarios 1-6 review just based on "subject notability guidelines" (SNG) "alone" for sake of the exercise. Do not consider any sources or other policies. Please answer if the subject meets the SNG guidelines based on the given content below, and specify which notability criteria they meet or fail. Scenario 1 An editor creates an article about "2028 Summer Olympics" in 2024 without providing any sources, is the subject considered not notable and why? Any Olympic Games will clearly require an article at some point and will have extensive coverage with "widespread ... impact", so the basic criteria set forth by WP:EVENTCRIT will undoubtedly be eventually met. Whether the article should be created in 2024 is a different issue governed by WP:FUTUREEVENT: Four years before any Olympic Games, there will already be plenty of verifiable information, such as host city, venues, approved events, etc. Sufficiently wide interest definitely exists The event, had it already taken place, would be notable, and it is almost certainly going to occur Preparation (and speculation) is already well underway Therefore, an article on the 2028 Summer Olympics would likely be appropriate if created in 2024. Per WP:NEXIST, the lack of sources in the article is irrelevant in relation to notability. As long as the information in the article is verifiable and does not strictly require inline citation per WP:V, it is fine, but could certainly be improved. —⁠PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 19:22, 12 August 2023 (UTC) Y Also sometimes if you are reviewing something like this, maybe of lesser importance than the olympics and it were too far out and poorly sourced, it might be appropriate to move to draft or redirect to the parent event (leaving a polite note to the creator) Josey Wales Parley 19:36, 13 August 2023 (UTC) Scenario 2 A New York city based 2022 start up software company , specializing in data mining, has just received a USD 200K investor fund. This seems tough to evaluate without some more specifics on the available sourcing. However, WP:NORG is largely concerned with ensuring that Wikipedia isn't used for promotion by tightening up the requirements for source independence and significant coverage. If the only sourcing is in relation to the investor fund, a few possible problems could arise. Even if the source provides some information about the company that would help in writing an article, announcements relating to investments are often routine, so this might fail WP:ORGDEPTH and be considered trivial coverage. It is also possible that the investment sourcing is not independent; even if not publicized by the company itself, groups with a financial stake like investors are not independent. Lastly, multiple sources are required to establish notability, so a single source relating to investment (or any other topic, significant or not), would not be sufficient to establish notability. Again, very context-dependent, but I would venture to say that this is probably not notable based on what was in the question. —⁠PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 19:22, 12 August 2023 (UTC) Y Again, judge each case on it's own merits, but very likely unlikely to be notable (yet) Josey Wales Parley 19:36, 13 August 2023 (UTC) Scenario 3 Joe Morrison is a professional footballer who plays as a goalkeeper with Celtic FC's B team and has played some Scottish 5th tier matches WP:NSPORTS is not particularly helpful here, as it does not establish specific indicators of likely significant coverage. So, WP:NBIO and the GNG will be relevant here. I am not very familiar with the levels of coverage typically attained by various levels of Scottish footballers. However, given that Morrison is on the reserve team and plays in a "regional", not "professional" league, I would imagine that coverage specifically pertaining to him biographically, and not just routine summaries of his actions in games, would be limited, therefore making him potentially not notable. —⁠PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 20:36, 12 August 2023 (UTC) Y Probably not notable yet (in the past NFOOTY may have made him notable if he managed to play a few minutes for the first team) Josey Wales Parley 19:36, 13 August 2023 (UTC) Scenario 4 An upcoming action drama title "Suleiman the Great" based on the the life of Suleiman the Magnificent, was reported to be in production in December 2024 and to be released on August 2025 in the cinemas. The film itself will likely eventually be notable. In my experience in the US, films that are released in cinemas will generally satisfy WP:NFO #1, i.e. they will likely receive several qualifying reviews. As noted in the guideline, this is a strong predictor that other sufficient sourcing, per GNG, relating to the film will likely exist, thereby justifying its inclusion. However, creating an article now, in August 2023, before production has begun, is almost certainly premature. Per WP:NFF, articles should only be created after principal photography has commenced, and then only when the production process itself is notable. Whether the latter is the case is probably highly dependent on how high-profile the film is and is difficult to judge with the limited information given. Regardless, at the earliest, an article would only be warranted after December 2024. —⁠PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 20:36, 12 August 2023 (UTC) Y Good answer Josey Wales Parley 19:36, 13 August 2023 (UTC) Scenario 5 A political candidates, without any previous or current political position, who is running for November 2024 election for a Senator position in United States with multiple local newspapers coverage of his candidacy. This is probably context-dependent. Strictly speaking through WP:NPOL, those requirements are not met, but other aspects of WP:NBIO may still apply. Sometimes Senate candidates, if lacking previous political experience, are notable in other ways, such as through business. That would potentially be qualifying for an article if appropriate significant coverage exists. In the absence of that, I would say that the next most important consideration is the impact of the election. If the election is in a safe state and it is likely that the candidate will lose, they probably fall under WP:BLP1E/WP:BIO1E: their only coverage is related to the election, they will probably remain low-profile after the election, and the event is not very significant in that it is routine and unimpactful. In this case, it is probably most appropriate to cover them in the election article. If the election is in a hotly contested swing state and the outcome could be highly impactful at the national level, their mere candidacy is likely to generate significant media coverage and warrant an article (although if this were the case, I would expect that more than "local newspapers" are covering the candidacy). Based on the extent of the coverage in only local newspapers, the former is more likely applicable here. (But again, it is impossible to say definitively outside of a specific case.) The candidate may very well be notable based on SIGCOV in those newspapers, but per WP:BIO1E, it would likely make more organizational sense to not maintain a separate article and instead incorporate verifiable information into the election article. If, of course, the candidate wins, a separate article would be warranted. —⁠PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 20:36, 12 August 2023 (UTC) Y And following an election we usually see a lot of new politician bios created (we also see a lot of candidates bios being prematurely created, I would rather move these to draft until after the election than have them deleted only to be recreated if they win) Josey Wales Parley 19:36, 13 August 2023 (UTC) Scenario 6 A singer who self produced his first album in May 2023 and his songs are listed in Spotify. This sounds very much like a non-notable musician, potentially one who is looking to use Wikipedia as a place for promotion. Based solely on the information provided, none of the criteria in WP:SINGER are likely to apply here. The bar for publishing on Spotify is not high, so just the existence of songs on Spotify is not any sort of indicator that the singer has attracted outside attention or is covered in reliable sources. Of course, if there is significant coverage in reliable, independent sources, a claim of notability may be justified. —⁠PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 20:36, 12 August 2023 (UTC) Y When you start reviewing articles you will certainly come accross a lot of these! Josey Wales Parley 19:36, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

Your first assignment is above, please ping me here whenever you have completed it - if you have any queries please ask on the Talk Page Josey Wales ^Parley 10:12, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

Joseywales1961, I think I'm done with this. Any feedback is appreciated. —⁠PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 21:29, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

PlanetJuice Hi and thanks, I'm travelling today so will look at these tonight and put up part 2 Josey Wales ^Parley 11:22, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

PlanetJuice - Very well done and well thought out answers to the above questions - I will post your next assignment later tonight Josey Wales ^Parley 19:36, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

Sources

Extended content

Background for trainees Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. As such, claims made in articles should be supported by independent (secondary), reliable sources for verification. Please read WP:RS, WP:IS, WP:RSP, WP:V, WP:PROVEIT, WP:Primary, WP:Secondary, and WP:Tertiary. You can contact WP:RX if you can not find the sources yourself either on the web due to paywalls or offline-only sources. Confirmation Please confirm below when you have read the background information pages listed above I've read these. Will complete the exercises in the morning. —⁠PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 04:18, 15 August 2023 (UTC) Please complete the Examples column in each of the tables below Exercises Sources (Part 1) 1. Topic Definition 5 Examples of each Comment by Josey Reliable source They are reliable sources that are not too old or new, and are independent from the topic. A New York Times article summarizing the arraignment against Donald Trump in his third indictment Y The summary coverage at the top of this FOX Sports article about the US loss to Sweden in the 2023 FIFA Women's World Cup knockout stage Y This NJ.com (relatively local) article about the lying in state of New Jersey Lieutenant Governor Sheila Oliver and the then-upcoming funeral Y A book, written by a subject matter expert and published by a well-regarded university press, describing the history of a railroad line Y A summary of various research related to an environmental issue, peer-reviewed and published in a topically-appropriate reputable journal Y —⁠PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 13:41, 15 August 2023 (UTC) Well done! Josey Wales Parley 20:53, 15 August 2023 (UTC) User generated sources They are sources made by users but without checking the verification of facts. A tweet from a sports fan claiming that a player transaction for one of their favorite teams is imminent Y User-posted (not critical) reviews on Rotten Tomatoes for a recently-released film Y A political activist's personal blog with a contentious, possibly libelous claim about a living person Y Remarks in the comments section of a news article posted on a reputable site, that independently interpret a primary source document Y A cast list on IMDb for an unreleased film Y —⁠PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 13:41, 15 August 2023 (UTC) If you haven't already got it - try installing User:Novem Linguae/Scripts/CiteHighlighter, which highlights a range of common sources in any article into green for reliable, red for unreliable and a few in betweeners (it may prove useful in future exercises) Josey Wales Parley 20:53, 15 August 2023 (UTC) Non Independent source They are sources that are not independent and have a close relationship with the topic. A press release, or a news source that closely mirrors a published press release, on a organization's efforts to combat food waste Y A company website with claims about the superiority of their product Y A politician's endorsement of a candidate from their political party Y A report directly commissioned by a company or organization investigating topics of interest to them Y A blog post by a group condemning the actions of another individual or group, when it is known that the two entities have conflicting views, interests, or goals Y —⁠PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 13:41, 15 August 2023 (UTC) Good work Josey Wales Parley 20:53, 15 August 2023 (UTC) 2. Type Definition Examples (10 Primary ; 5 Secondary ; 5 Tertiary) Comment by Josey Primary Primary sources that are very close the the subject or topic. A tombstone of a historical figure with an inscription that may be of encyclopedic interest A research article describing the methods and results from an experiment with a new drug, written by those conducting research The original indictment filing from Georgia against Donald Trump et al. A film, when used to summarize the film's plot Barack Obama's speech announcing officially, for the first time, the killing of Osama bin Laden A written witness account of a major robbery, provided to the police and released to the public A company's website, when used for claims about a company made by itself A breaking news article announcing publicly, for the first time, the death of a famous actor A video captured by a bystander of an instance of police brutality The text of the Constitution of the United States —⁠PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 13:41, 15 August 2023 (UTC) Y Josey Wales Parley 20:53, 15 August 2023 (UTC) Secondary Secondary sources are sources that relies on primary sources. A reputable news article analyzing that same Trump indictment and synthesizing material to provide additional context or draw additional conclusions not contained in the document itself A scholarly review article evaluating the findings of the drug experiment and other similar experiments to summarize current knowledge A piece from a historian commenting on the significance of the tombstone inscription Work from a constitutional scholar that interprets and applies the Constitution to a specific issue, perhaps while also considering past court cases A media organization's reporting on or analysis of a high-profile Wikipedia dispute —⁠PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 13:41, 15 August 2023 (UTC) Y Josey Wales Parley 20:53, 15 August 2023 (UTC) Tertiary Tertiary sources relies in primary and secondary sources or only in secondary sources. The Wikipedia article on coal A high school-level biology textbook that summarizes well-established and previously-reviewed knowledge A documentary that uses primary sources for the viewer's enjoyment but conceptually only sets forth ideas that have been published in other interpretations of primary sources A dictionary that provides a surface-level summary of a word's meaning and evolution A sports book summarizing notable games and moments in that sport, along with previously-published analysis of the impact of those moments —⁠PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 13:41, 15 August 2023 (UTC) Y all good here Josey Wales Parley 20:53, 15 August 2023 (UTC) 3. Subject Primary Secondary Tertiary Comment by Josey Example: Art Example:Sculpture Example:Article critiquing the sculpture Example:Encyclopedic article on the sculptor History Diary entry written immediately after a Civil War battle by someone involved Detailed analysis written and published by the curators of a museum that explains the entry and provides context Museum blog article with a list of the "top 10" most significant Civil War artifacts displayed by the museum, summarizing the analysis to provide information to readers Y Science Research article describing a new chemical process Review article validating the methods of the research, related research, potential impacts and applications, etc. Listing and description of some of the most important scientific breakthroughs of the century Y Athletes Slow-motion video of a championship-winning scoring play Sports article providing an in-depth analysis of the setup, execution, impact, etc. of the play, using the video as an organizational guide and a source for commentary Online profile published many years later that summarizes the player's entire career, including this play Y I think you've got the hang of this! Josey Wales Parley 20:53, 15 August 2023 (UTC) —⁠PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 14:04, 15 August 2023 (UTC) Exercises Sources (Part 2) 4. Please explain in your own words why the content claimed needs to be verified? Answer: One of the core content policies is verifiability. Since Wikipedia is an encyclopedia aiming to present the sum of human knowledge, by its nature, the content needs to be accurate. Two goals are achieved by requiring that all material can be supported by information from a reliable source. For one, by fostering a culture requiring verifiability, readers can grow to understand that content on Wikipedia will usually be accurate for everyday purposes, supporting the project's overarching goal. Second, readers can, if needed, go to external reliable sources to check that the Wikipedia material is supported by those sources. Material that has been challenged or otherwise meets the requirements for inline citation will have the source directly cited, making this process easier. In certain cases, ensuring verifiability is necessary for potentially serious reasons, such as with BLPs and the possibility of libel. —⁠PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 01:03, 16 August 2023 (UTC) Y Josey Wales Parley 18:54, 16 August 2023 (UTC) 5.Could we use Wikipedia as the source? and why? Answer: Generally no. Since Wikipedia can be edited by anyone at any time, there is no guarantee that any information on Wikipedia is reliable. It amounts to not much more than user-generated content, as there is no formal editorial process for publication. There is an easy workaround to this problem, which is just to use the reliable sources that the article cites (or that the information is supported by) instead. An exception to this case exists when Wikipedia is used as a source about itself, subject to the restrictions of WP:SELFSOURCE and on using primary source material. —⁠PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 01:03, 16 August 2023 (UTC) Y Josey Wales Parley 18:54, 16 August 2023 (UTC) 6.Give an example and explain why a source is reliable but not independent of a subject? Answer: One situation where this is the case is when SELFSOURCE applies. That is, an organization or entity's own website or publication (which is clearly not independent of any topic related to the entity) may provide information that is acceptable for use. SELFSOURCE limits this to material which is "neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim"; therefore, objective details which the entity has an interest in being accurate about, such as the name of a CEO, are fine, while material that could be manipulated to favor the entity would raise RS and NPOV issues since those same views may not be held in reliable, independent sources. —⁠PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 01:03, 16 August 2023 (UTC) Y Josey Wales Parley 18:54, 16 August 2023 (UTC) 7.Give an example and explain why a source is independent source but not reliable? Answer: It's possible to have a source that is truly independent – it has zero vested interest, either for or against a topic – but still be obviously not reliable for one reason or another. For example, someone could review a new film on their blog. In all likelihood, they have no connection to the film, but if they're not a published expert in film review, the source holds no reliability for Wikipedia's purposes. —⁠PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 01:03, 16 August 2023 (UTC) Y Josey Wales Parley 18:54, 16 August 2023 (UTC) Exercises Sources (Part 3 - Source Assessment Practice) In the tables below, please indicate "y" for yes or "n" for no after "ind", "rel" and "sig" (see first example) and give a brief explanation of why you place "y" or "n" for each source. Note: These are old versions of part of the pages and some references may not now work anymore - if that happens to you please indicate as "N" and say "Dead link" in the second part so I will know to change the question for the next student Josey Wales Parley 18:54, 16 August 2023 (UTC) 8 Fallingwater, Mill Run, Pennsylvania (1937) Frank Lloyd Wright (June 8, 1867 – April 9, 1959) was an American architect, interior designer, writer, and educator. Wright believed in designing structures that were in harmony with humanity and its environment, a philosophy he called organic architecture. His creative period spanned more than 70 years. He works includes The Guggenheim, swirling, snail-shaped museum in the middle of Manhattan. Fallingwater, which has been called "the best all-time work of American architecture." This is one of Wright's most famous private residences (completed 1937), was built for Mr. and Mrs. Edgar J. Kaufmann, Sr., at Mill Run, Pennsylvania. Constructed over a 30-foot waterfall, it was designed according to Wright's desire to place the occupants close to the natural surroundings. The house was intended to be more of a family getaway, rather than a live-in home. Source assessment table: Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG? https://nypost.com/2017/06/07/frank-lloyd-wright-was-a-house-builder-and-homewrecker/ Written decades after death; no apparent connection to subject Probably reliable for the specific statement sourced, but unreliable overall and for GNG per WP:RSP and article's focus on a potentially contentious aspect of the subject's life Article dedicated to in-depth coverage of subject ✘ No https://franklloydwright.org/work/ Subject's personal website For uncontroversial facts like the one this supports in the article In-depth listing and coverage of subject's works ✘ No https://web.archive.org/web/20080302053743/http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/jul2004/nf20040728_3153_db078.htm No apparent connection to subject Appears to be a reputable publication for the topic; see also note about the Great Innovators series at the bottom Detailed coverage of career, legacy, etc. ✔ Yes https://books.google.com/books?id=KSA1HTTU-eMC No apparent connection to subject Author has several other published works in this field; book published by reputable publisher Book-length coverage of subject's life ✔ Yes This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}. References Y Josey Wales Parley 20:57, 20 August 2023 (UTC) 9 Jordan Lennon (born February 22, 2000), is a British film producer and actor. Lennon is currently a member of BAFTA. He continues to work aside 20th Century Fox, Warner Bros, Wicked Wales, Capture Studios, Cineworld, Paramount Pictures, and Rockefeller Foundation. At age 16, the Vice President of 20th Century Fox, Paul Higginson. Who previously worked on Star Wars, Titanic, and Independence Day took on Jordan and Rowan Snow as a mentor. In December 2018, Jordan and Rowan finished British Film Academy. Jordan lived in Skelmersdale for 10 years before moving to Rhyl, North Wales. He's currently writing 'Stranger in the Night' scrreenplay for Warner Brothers. Source assessment table: Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG? https://www.imdb.com/name/nm8902348/ ? Because it is self-published, it possibly contains information contributed by those not independent to the subject (unrelated, but dead link) Self-published IMDb provides near-indiscriminate inclusion of people in the film industry, so conveys no notability ✘ No http://www.bafta.org/wales Dead link, redirects to BAFTA home page ✘ No https://www.linkedin.com/in/jordan-d-98111a125 Profile is controlled by the subject (unrelated, but dead link) ? Generally no, but may be reliable for certain statements per WP:SELFSOURCE Most likely no, to the extent that is required for notability, but potentially context-dependent ✘ No https://www.behindthevoiceactors.com/Jordan-David/ Seemingly independent database site Generally reliable for credits per RSP; no specific red flags seen here Routine coverage, potentially indiscriminate; not SIGCOV for notability per RSP ✘ No This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}. References Y Thanks for pointing out the dead link, the BAFTA website as a source for him getting a film award would most likely have been reliable Josey Wales Parley 20:57, 20 August 2023 (UTC) 10 Sonny Bill Williams 2010 Sonny William Williams (born 3 August 1985), who is a Muslim, is a New Zealand All blacks rugby union footballer, Williams was a Marist Saints junior when he was spotted playing in Auckland by Bulldogs talent scout John Ackland. In 2002 he was offered a contract and moved to Sydney (as the youngest player to ever sign with an NRL club) to play in the Bulldogs' junior grades. Source assessment table: Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG? https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-7505117/2019-Rugby-World-Cup-Sonny-Bill-Williams-expecting-fourth-child.html No apparent connection to subject Deprecated per RSP Not to be used for establishing notability per RSP; regardless, appears to be routine coverage that is not related to the reason for the subject's notability, and thus likely wouldn't be considered significant for notability purposes ✘ No http://stats.allblacks.com/asp/Profile.asp?ABID=1108 Player profile on team website For certain uncontroversial facts and statistics, subject to SELFSOURCE Significant amounts of potentially useful biographical information and statistics ✘ No http://www.nzherald.co.nz/warriors-league-team/news/article.cfm?c_id=360&objectid=10399308 News outlet with no apparent connection to subject Generally reliable per RSP, no specific red flags seen Strictly a passing mention in an article about another subject ✘ No http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/10/01/1096527943523.html News outlet with no apparent connection to subject Generally reliable per RSP, no specific red flags seen News article-length coverage devoted to the subject ✔ Yes This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}. References Y Josey Wales Parley 20:57, 20 August 2023 (UTC) 11 David Petraeus David Howell Petraeus AO (/pɪˈtreɪ.əs/; born November 7, 1952) is a retired United States Army general and public official. He served as Director of the Central Intelligence Agency from September 6, 2011, until his resignation on November 9, 2012 after his affair with Paula Broadwell was reported. Petraeus was born in Cornwall-on-Hudson, New York, the son of Sixtus Petraeus (1915–2008), a sea captain from Franeker, Netherlands. In 2003, Petraeus commanded the 101st Airborne Division in the fall of Baghdad Source assessment table: Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG? https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/11/09/david-petraeus-cia-resign-nbc/1695271/ News outlet with no apparent connection to subject; appears to provide significant additional analysis on top of what would just be contained in a press release Generally reliable per RSP, no specific red flags seen Full news article covering the resignation, his career, context on current events, etc. ✔ Yes http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2011/09/06/petraeus-sworn-into-cia.cnn?iref=allsearch CNN itself is independent of the subject, and the fact that they presumably captured and then later distributed the video serves as an indication that an independent source deems the topic noteworthy enough to publicize; note that the remarks may not be considered independent Video captured or reproduced by a reputable news source Merely a primary source video of the oath of office and some remarks; not secondary and provides no commentary or analysis ✘ No https://www.huffpost.com/entry/david-petraeus-paula-broadwell_n_2118893 News outlet with no apparent connection to the subject HuffPost itself is listed as no consensus at RSP, but the article is syndicated from AP, which is generally reliable. No specific red flags seen here. Significant coverage and context on Petraeus' reactions and surrounding events ✔ Yes https://www.geni.com/people/Sixtus-Petraeus/6000000015418360012 ? RSP notes that this is self-published, so unclear whether content could be contributed by those with a COI Self-published Merely indiscriminate biographical information on the subject's parent; not useful in establishing the notability of his son ✘ No http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2010/05/petraeus-exclusive-201005 No apparent connection to subject Vanity Fair is generally reliable per RSP; the author is listed as a "contributing editor", but there is no indication that this content bypassed any normal editorial processes While this article largely covers aspects of his early life irrelevant to the events and positions leading to his notability, the mere fact that he is written about in such depth indicates that Vanity Fair considers him sufficiently noteworthy ✔ Yes https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/beyond/interviews/petraeus.html Publicized by an independent outlet, but the content itself is largely interview responses by a non-independent party Nothing specific about this program of PBS in RSP or NPPSG, but PBS is a well-respected broadcaster in the US Much of the content is Petraeus' commentary or analysis of other topics, not content relating to himself; there may be some secondary content here, but most of the content about Petraeus himself – the content relevant to notability – is primary and therefore not useful in determining notability ✘ No http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/david-petraeus-general-surge-401740.html No apparent connection to the topic Generally reliable per RSP; no specific red flags seen Significant, in-depth analysis of Petraeus' role in the military ✔ Yes This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}. References Y With caution, we might be able to use something not too controversial like a brothers name (if there were one) or something like that from the Geni page, but you are right there is nothing useful on this one Josey Wales Parley 20:57, 20 August 2023 (UTC) 12 Martina Hingis is a Swiss former professional tennis player. She won five Grand Slam singles titles. Hingis was one of the highest-paid female athletes in 2000. She retired in November 2007 after being hampered by a hip injury for several months and testing positive for a metabolite of cocaine during that year's Wimbledon Championships, which led to a two-year suspension from the sport. Source assessment table: Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG? https://www.instagram.com/martinahingis80/ Subject's social media profile Only for limited statements of fact about themselves, subject to SELFSOURCE Insignificant coverage on any one topic, with trivial amounts of content in text captions and little to no secondary analysis ✘ No https://www.latimes.com/sports/more/la-sp-us-open-hingis-20170910-story.html No apparent connection to subject Generally reliable per RSP; no specific red flags seen A bit short as far as news articles go, but probably borderline significant as it provides important context and synthesis of material to explain, for example, past titles ✔ Yes https://books.google.com.my/books?id=4x3fQ920EUMC&pg=PA197&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false No apparent connection to subject Appears to be reputably published ? Difficult to tell with the Google Books preview; the references to Hingis on just page 197 are trivial mentions, but it appears there are other mentions distributed throughout the entire text that may constitute SIGCOV ? Unknown https://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/id/21171438/tennis-another-twist-bizarre-career-martina-hingis No apparent connection to subject ESPN is considered reliable for sports per NPPSG; no red flags seen here Provides significant context and coverage of her career and retirement history ✔ Yes https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2007/nov/01/tennis No apparent connection to subject Generally reliable per RSP; no specific red flags seen Significant in that the article covers this topic in depth; there is a lot of primary source material, but also a bit of commentary and synthesis from the source on her test and her career ✔ Yes This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}. References Y Thanks for pointing out the google books ref shortcomings (there was previously more available to view - from Ireland now I can see nothing of this book, so will remove that questionin future) - Occasionally, if you are reviewing new pages and you come across such a source, it is allowed to AGF that the editor has full access to the source (assuming the article is otherwise OK) Josey Wales Parley 20:57, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Comments

Hi PlanetJuice, Your next assignment is above, Good luck! Josey Wales ^Parley 21:09, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi Joseywales1961, just letting you know I have completed this part. —⁠PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 14:09, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks PlanetJuice I'll check these tonight and prepare the next set - In the interim, while we are going through this syllabus, it would be a good idea to take part over the next week or so in some AfD discussions, try four or five on subjects you are comfortable with and where you are the first to comment after the nominator - I'll look at your AfD Stats page in a week or so see how you're getting on Josey Wales ^Parley 19:28, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

PlanetJuice Just 4 questions which I think you're going to find easy enough - I'll add a slightly more difficult source assessment exercise tomorrow night Josey Wales ^Parley 20:56, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi PlanetJuice, well done (as I assumed you would do!) on part 2, part 3 is now added above - I may not be around to look at part 3 answers until Sunday evening so you have plenty of time. Good luck Josey Wales ^Parley 18:54, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi Joseywales1961, forgot to ping, but I'm finished with the source assessments. No rush to review! —⁠PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 20:59, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi PlanetJuice all well done with the sources - I was a bit late getting back home this evening so I'll post your next assignment tomorrow Josey Wales ^Parley 21:00, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Content Policy

Extended content

Article titles (Part 1) Please confirm below that you have read WP:TITLE and answer the questions below A: 1.An article named "Hannibal Barca" - Does this article name need to be changed? and why? (please explain based on Wikipedia guidelines and name/link the guidelines in your answer) Hannibal Barca was a Carthaginian general and statesman who is widely considered one of the greatest military commanders in history. His father, Hamilcar Barca, was a leading Carthaginian commander during the First Punic War (264–241 BC). References Answer: 2. An article name "Magic Johnson". Does this article name need to be changed? and why? (please explain based on Wikipedia guidelines and name/link the guidelines in your answer) Earvin "Magic" Johnson Jr. (born August 14, 1959) is an American retired professional basketball player and former president of basketball operations of the Los Angeles Lakers of the National Basketball Association (NBA). He played point guard for the Lakers for 13 seasons. References Answer: Biographies of living persons (Part 2) Please confirm that you have read WP:BLP and answer the questions below. A: 3. As per the texts below, please explain if the content is acceptable for inclusion and why. (please explain based on Wikipedia guidelines and name/link the guidelines in your answer) Conor Anthony McGregor (born 14 July 1988) is an Irish professional mixed martial artist and boxer. His is a former Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) featherweight and lightweight champion. On 15 August 2019, TMZ Sports published a video that appeared to show McGregor punching a man at The Marble Arch Pub in Dublin. The incident happened on 6 April and was originally reported by Irish media, although without the video that showed the attack. Irish police stated in April that they had opened an investigation. McGregor was charged with assault and first appeared in court on 11 October 2019. In April 2019, McGregor is the father of Terri Murray's son, Clodagh. Murray bedded McGregor in 2017 at his hotel after the Aintree Grand National just four weeks bofore McGregor's girlfriend Dee Devlin gave birth to their son. References Answer: 4. As per the texts below, please explain the if the content is acceptable for inclusion and why. (please explain based on Wikipedia guidelines and name/link the guidelines in your answer) Diana Nyad (née Sneed; born August 22, 1949) is an American author, journalist, motivational speaker, and long-distance swimmer who lives in 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW in Washington, D.C. and could be contacted at +0-202-456-6213. Nyad gained national attention in 1975 when she swam around Manhattan (28 mi or 45 km) and in 1979 when she swam from North Bimini, The Bahamas, to Juno Beach, Florida (102 mi (164 km)). In 2013, on her fifth attempt and at age 64, she became the first person confirmed to swim from Cuba to Florida without the aid of a shark cage, swimming from Havana to Key West (110 mi or 180 km). References Answer:

Hi PlanetJuice Your next assignenment (parts 1 & 2) are now above. I'll check back in later on in the week - please ping me if you need assistance or when finished. Good luck Josey Wales ^Parley 20:11, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi Josey, as an update and regarding the last edit to this page, things have started to get busier for me lately. I have gradually been reading up on policy from the last assignment, but my pace will probably have to slow down going forward. Hoping to get the next part done by next weekend. —⁠PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 20:32, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi PlanetJuice, thanks for letting me know although the edit wasn't particularly aimed at you (I'm adding it to all students pages just to free up slots if there a no edits in a reasonable amount of time) - you're doing very well so far, have a great weekend Josey Wales ^Parley 23:16, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.