User:Onel5969/NPPSchool/Asartea

Welcome Asartea 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 for them to complete. Please make sure you have this page added to your watchlist (I have done so already). Your NPP School page has been specifically designed according to you and what you have requested instruction in - for that reason, please be as specific as possible when under my instruction, so that I know the best ways to help you (and do not be afraid to let me know if you think something isn't working).

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

How to use this page

This page will be built up over your time in the Academy, with new sections being added as you complete old ones. Each section will end with a task, written in bold type - this might just ask 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. I will normally try and put assignments in bold though follow-up question will just use normal Wikipedia conversation methods. Let me know at any point if you have questions. We will also work at your pace. I'll usually grade your responses the same day (or the next morning), and immediately put forth the next set. If you take a few days to complete a section, or step away due to real life for a week, that's cool. It's up to you. Also, feel free to use this page's talkpage for communication, so comments don't get lost on my talk page (which can get busy).

Getting started

The first thing is to read, really read, WP:NPP and then let me know what you think are the two or three parts of that you feel your skills are the strongest and two or three where you could still grow.

Strong points

1. CSD's are something I've done quite a few times, although I'm weaker at some of the more notability oriented ones
2. Copyvio detection/cleanup. I've helped out at both WP:CCI and via copypatrol in cleaning up both new and old copyvio.

   Cool. Don't say you're "weaker" at the notability oriented ones. They are merely tougher for every editor. I know unless an article says something like, "John Q. Smith is an 11th grade student at Xavier High School, and is really cool", they can be tricky. Nice to know about copyvio, we'll get into that in-depth during the course. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:56, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Points for growth

1. Notability, especially SNG's.
2. Source assessment, I know the basis but don't feel confident in the more difficult cases yet.

   Excellent. Couple of thoughts before we get into the syllabus:

   Copyvio does look easy, but it's not as easy as it looks. The two areas which make it difficult to me are WP:MIRROR, and Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia, which we'll go over in more detail during that section of the syllabus.

   Notability. The cornerstone. And it will be the first, and most extensive section we go over during this school. There is GNG, and of course those pesky little SNG's. Again, we'll go over this in detail. Remember, while we try to be as objective as possible, there is some subjectivity to this process. Two editors can look at the same sources and reach different conclusions. During this course, if you disagree with my assessment, I want you to feel free and comfortable with pushing back and asking me to explain in more detail.

Now we begin. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:56, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Notability

PART 1

Questions

Question 1

In your own words, how is notability defined on Wikipedia? The purpose of the notability policy is to provide a basic standard of well notability to ensure enough reliable sources will exists to comply with the RS and OR policies. It also ensures that enough neutral should exist to ensure WP:WEIGTH can be followed in the article. The specific criteria an article needs to comply with to be considered notable are defined in GNG and the SNG policies.

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:50, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Question 2

Would step by step instructions on "How to change a car tire" be considered a notable topic in Wikipedia? Why or why not? No, per WP:NOTGUIDE Wikipedia isn't the place to have how-to manuals. If the article was of suffiecent quality I might check if there is a Wikimedia project which does cover guides (I'm actually not sure) and look into potentially transwikiing the article to that project if one exists.

Y - yup, the specific criteria is NOTGUIDE. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:50, 26 April 2021 (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 can be used to establish notability, so its important to check both when reviewing. WP:NCORP is an exception in that the article must meet it even if it meets GNG. WP:NACADEMIC is also weird, since if notability is established under that guideline I believe it trumps GNG's requirements.

Y - The purpose of the SNG's is to show, in specific regimens, what MAY be notable. You've pointed out the two most notable (see what I did there? ) examples of the tension between GNG and SNG's. WP:NCORP, specifically, WP:CORPDEPTH (which also applies to organizations, including schools), does in practice almost always trump GNG. Contrariwise, NSCHOLAR does trump GNG. Another one is WP:NPOL, which like NACADEMIC is a subset of WP:NBIO, which in reviewing, if a person meets those criteria, mark it reviewed. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:50, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Subject-specific notability guidelines

1. Please categorize the subject-specific notability guidelines (listed at Category:Wikipedia notability guidelines) into the following three categories

Primarily additional criteria that are likely to indicate notability

• Everything else

Primarily additional considerations that define or restrict the nature of coverage or sources required

• WP:NCORP
• WP:NACADEMICS defines the coverage/sources required.

Even mix of the previous two categories

• WP:NFILM seems to both establish extra criteria and include a hardfail criteria (Films that have not yet have commenced principal photography)

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:50, 26 April 2021 (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?

That even though an article might meet the SNG criteria this does not always mean it will actually be notable. Most SNG's only provide more subject specific criteria that might indicate notability. Its only WP:NACADEMICS I think which has criteria which when met trump any other notability guidelines. -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 08:07, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Y - also, as I said above, WP:NPOL. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:50, 26 April 2021 (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.

For scenarios 7-11 specify which SNGs would establish the subject's notability.

Scenario 1

An editor creates an article about "2028 Summer Olympics" without providing any sources

I can't find any specific SNG's for future Olympics. The WP:NOLYMPICS section of WP:NSPORT seems mostly concerned with establishing notability for athletes/nations/events at past Olympics, not future ones. I then checked WP:NEVENT but that seems to mostly repeat the warnings of WP:CRYSTALBALL. I would say Soft fail for SNG, fallback on GNG -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 08:07, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Y - spot on. Using just SNG's, it doesn't pass. More importantly is the lack of references. I would normally turn this into a redirect. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:50, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Scenario 2

A New York city based 2020 start up software company , specializing in data mining, has just received a USD 200K investor fund.

WP:NCORP doesn't seem to suggest that just getting $200K is is notable in itself and in my opinion it would not be. Since this fails under WP:NCORP it would need to meet the primary criteria of that policy. Since this example doesn't suggest or provides secondary sources or significant coverage, SNG hard-fail, cannot use GNG -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 08:07, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Y - Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:50, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Scenario 3

Movsar Evloev who is a Ultimate Fighting Championships fighters with the undefeated mixed martial arts record of 12-0.

He seems to pass at least WP:NMMA #1 having fought at least three professional fights in the UFC, which is a top tier organization according to WP:MMATIER. SNG pass -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 08:07, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:50, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Scenario 4

An upcoming action drama title "Suleiman the Great" based on the the life of Suleiman the Magnificent, which will be in production in January 2021 and to be released on August 2021 in the cinemas.

Under WP:NFF this could be notable if they have started principal photography. The future tense suggest not, but on the other hand its April 2021 right now so they might have already done so if they want to have it in the cinema by August 2021. I don't know enough about films to make a guess which way it falls. Based on just this info I would say SNG fail -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 08:07, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Y - spot on, and this was purposely a tricky one, due to this being April, and the article says that production will begin in January. If there is no sourcing showing that principal photography has begun, then it doesn't meet NFILM, but if there is a source claiming the production has started, even if not stated in the article, it would pass NFILM. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:50, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Scenario 5

A political candidates, without any previous or current political position, who is running for November 2020 election for a Senator position in United States with multiple local newspapers coverage of his candidacy.

Per WP:NPOL they need to use the meet GNG since they are unelected candidate. SNG soft fail, can use GNG -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 08:07, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Y - and even be careful of GNG in this instance. Most candidates will not survive AfD, even if there is a lot of local coverage. Local coverage is to be expected. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:50, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Scenario 6

A singer who self produced his first album in May 2019 and his songs are listed in Spotify.

Seems to fail all 12 criteria of WP:NSINGER based on just this info. SNG soft fail, can use GNG, athough based on this info I would suspect they fail GNG as well. -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 08:18, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Y - spot on. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:50, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Scenario 7

Carlos Alós-Ferrer

As a professor falls under WP:NACADEMIC. He is also a editor-in-chief so he also falls under WP:NEDITOR although the criteria layed out there don't really seem to focus on editors? -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 08:18, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:50, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Scenario 8

Alistair Overeem

Mixed martial artist, so WP:NMMA -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 08:18, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:50, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Scenario 9

Jennifer Lopez

WP:NSINGER -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 08:18, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:50, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Scenario 10

Three Mile Island accident

WP:NEVENT -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 08:18, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:50, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Scenario 11

Persepolis

I would assume WP:GEOLAND? Although a question from me, does world heritage site statisfy WP:NBUILDING #1? Like I would assume so but it only says national level ones -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 08:18, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Y - although in this instance, WP:GEOFEAT would probably be more appropriate. Which is the answer to your question since NBUILDING and GEOFEAT are the same. All World Heritage Sites are automatically notable, as are all buildings listed on the NRHP. Listed buildings in the UK are a bit trickier, as they have different classes. In those cases all Grade I buildings are considered notable, and virtually all Grade II* as well. Grade II, however, does not automatically confer notability, although they almost always pass GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:50, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Sources

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. WP:NPPSG may be a useful reference for looking up the reliability of a source that has been discussed before on Wikipedia.

You can contact WP:RX if you could not find the sources yourself either on the web due to paywalls or offline-only sources.

---

Exercises

1.

Topic	Definition	5 Examples	Comment by Trainer
Reliable source	A reliable independent (has no connection with/has no POV about the subject) published (is avaliable to the general public) source with a reputation for fact checking and if older, not superseded by new information (especially in academic/scientific articles)	(example)The Guardian newspaper Anything listed in green at WP:RSPS review articles published in reliable scientific journals (university level) textbooks Reliable newspapers/newssites Books published by reputable and reliable publishing houses	Y - although independence has nothing to do with reliability. For example, a bio off a us.gov website for an ambassador is reliable, but not independent. Onel5969 TT me 12:45, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
User generated sources	Any sources which primarily rely on users, without editorial oversight to create content	Wikipedia IMDB Fandom/Gamepedia wikis Any social media sites Reviews on any web vendor	Y - and of course, blogs. Newsblogs are problematic, as not all are reliable, although most are. You have to be careful with them. I would also point out that crowdsourced websites would also fall in this category. Onel5969 TT me 12:45, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Non Independent source	A source which has a POV and a vested interest with regards to the subject. This includes financial relationships, personal relationships etc	A press release by a company A article in a source where the company paid for it to be published A company blog A blog about someone's family, published by a family member An autobiography	Y - spot on Onel5969 TT me 12:45, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

2.

Type	Definition	Examples (15 Primary ; 5 Secondary ; 5 Tertiary)	Comment by Trainer
Primary	Original content close to a particular event, usually written/created by people who were close to/directly involved in the event.	(example) scientific journal articles reporting experimental research results survivor of a traffic accident telling what they saw an autobiography an newsarticle consisting solely of a interview with a involved person an newspaper solely sourced to an unknown/anonymous senior offical in the administration a press release by an company a blog by the subject a companies website a diary recordings of a court case a YouTube video might by a directly involved person Tweets by the subject Instagram posts by the subject comments from a government official during a press conference/briefing Facebook post by the subject other social media activities by the subject a article based on a anonymous insider	Y - excellent - another one would be court transcripts, not just court recordings, they can be different. Onel5969 TT me 12:45, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Secondary		(example) newspaper scientific review in a reputable scientific journal a book by a expert with no personal involvement published by a reputable company Magazine article not written by the subject in a reliable newspaper meta-analysis in a reputable scientific journal a video published by a reputable news agency collating information about a event? (not sure about this one)	Y - although you have to make sure the book is not self-published. Regarding the video, you're right, that's an iffy one, but in terms of reliability. It would depend on where the video was published, as to both reliability and secondary status. For example if it's a video on WABC News' website, that would be secondary. If it's a video from WABC News but on someone else's YouTube channel, than it's not. Onel5969 TT me 12:45, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Tertiary		(example) encyclopedias introductory university textbooks Encyclopedia Britannica Travel Guide Almanacs Campbell Biology textbook	Y - Excellent, although Travel Guides with good editorial oversight could be classed as a secondary source. Onel5969 TT me 12:45, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

I'm done with this section but I would appreciate if you could give me some more example of primary sources. I was running out of ideas by the end. -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 15:06, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

You gave a pretty comprehensive list. As I said the court transcripts would be one. And you had newspaper interviews, but any type of interviews (magazines, videos from reliable sources, etc.). Those are the only ones which come immediately to mind. When reviewing, if you come across something new reach out to another NPP'er, or post on the NPP Talk page. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:45, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

3.

Subject	Primary	Secondary	Tertiary	Comment by Trainer
Example: Art	Example:A photo of a sculpture	Example:An article in The New Yorker that reviews a new exhibit	Example:A museum catalog entry	Y - a museum catalog entry MIGHT be considered primary. Tertiary would be the Encyclopedia Brittanica article about the sculpture. Onel5969 TT me 12:45, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
History	a diary	a reliable book interpreting the diary	a history textbook	Y Onel5969 TT me 12:45, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Science	science article mentioning new results	a review article mentioning the results	a scientific encyclopedia	Y Onel5969 TT me 12:45, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Athletes	recording/transcript of a recording of the sports announcer during a game	a newspaper summarizing the game	sports almanac	Y - nice job. Onel5969 TT me 12:45, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

4. Please explain in your own words why the content claimed needs to be verified?

WP:V is how we ensure that all information that makes it into a Wikipedia article is actually reliable and true, and how we're able to check for NPOV issues in the original source. Without it Wikipedia would turn into massive amounts of OR and edit wars about whether or not something is true. -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 15:18, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Y - nicely said. WP:VERIFY is, imho, one of the most problematic areas of WP. There are literally hundreds of thousands of articles, if not millions, that have information which has no sourcing to meet the verify guideline. Verify is subject to secondary and tertiary sourcing. Primary sourcing can also be used in a limited basis for verifiability. For instance, you could use a company website to provide verification of the founding date, etc. But you couldn't use an interview with a rapper/singer to verify a claim that they were a Grammy winner.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:45, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

5. Could we use Wikipedia as the source? and why?

No, Wikipedia is a User generated sometimes POV website which cannot be relied upon to have fact-checked or have any editorial oversight at all over its content. The only time when it may be appropriate to cite Wikipedia is as a WP:SELFSOURCE (God it looks bleak when its put like that) -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 15:18, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Y - spot on. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:45, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

6. Give an example and explain why a source is reliable but not independent of a subject?

A normally reliable newspaper publishes a news article which is essentially just a refurbished press release. The newspaper is reliable in principle but in this specific case they are simply recycling a press release which isn't independent without engaging in editorial oversight -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 15:18, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Y - spot on, we run into this a lot in Indian newspapers. And I'm beginning to see it frequently in African sources as well. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:45, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

7. Give an example and explain why a source is independent source but not reliable?

A selfpublished one man blog publishes a blog about a company they have no COI with. They are independt from the company they are publishing the blog post about but since they are a selfpublished one man source they almost certainly lack editorial oversight and fact checking, which makes them non reliable -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 15:18, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Y - perfect, nice job. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:45, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

---

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.

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/	The source is major newspaper	While the Post is marked as red on WP:RSPS it also notes that is mainly for political articles.	The source discusses the subject directly and in detail	✔ Yes
https://franklloydwright.org/work/	Appears to be run by his foundation, clear COI.	Appears to be nothing journalistic just a bunch of self praising pieces	all about him.	✘ No
https://web.archive.org/web/20080302053743/http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/jul2004/nf20040728_3153_db078.htm	Article seems to be part of a series of great innovators, I can't find anything suggesting COI	bloomberg.com/businessweek which seems to be what this became is listed as reliable on WP:RSPS	Article is exclusively about him	✔ Yes
https://books.google.com/books?id=KSA1HTTU-eMC	independetely published book	Wiley (publisher) which this is credited to are a reputable publishing company	biography about 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 - good catch on the Post. The FLW org piece, while not independent, can be reliable. See WP:BIASED.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:15, 1 May 2021 (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/	?  Comment: Link is dead, wayback doesn't have it	?	?	? Unknown
http://www.bafta.org/wales	He is a member of Bafta		The link appears to be leading to a landing page, no mention is immediatetely apparent	✘ No
https://www.linkedin.com/in/jordan-d-98111a125	?  Comment: Link is dead, wayback doesn't have it	?	?	? Unknown
https://www.behindthevoiceactors.com/Jordan-David/	Can't see a COI	contains user generated content	Page appears to be about a different Jordan	✘ 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 - even though two of the links are dead, the other assessments are valid. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:15, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

---

10

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/	The source is major newspaper	The source is reputable published source	The source discusses the subject directly and in detail	✔ Yes
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2011/09/06/petraeus-sworn-into-cia.cnn?iref=allsearch	its just a video of the event, no journalism going on here. Primary source	CNN is a reliable news agency	Video is entirely about him, although I'm wondering if there is enough content to be significant	✘ No
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/david-petraeus-paula-broadwell_n_2118893	No reason to suspect a COI	While the article is published on the huffington post site its actually from The Associated Press which is reliable	Article mainly talks about him	✔ Yes
https://www.geni.com/people/Sixtus-Petraeus/6000000015418360012	The site doesn't have a COI, although someone with one could edit it. Given the content of the page though I don't suspect thats the case	Open usergenerated wiki	page is about his father	✘ No
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2010/05/petraeus-exclusive-201005	While it vaguely sounds like a interview the author wrapped it in a story	WP:RPS says its reliable, although it seems it might have been a slightly biased story? It sounds a bit promotional to me	Whole article is about him	✔ Yes
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/beyond/interviews/petraeus.html	Its an direct interview	PBS seems reliable, although I couldn't find it on WP:RSP?	Its an interview with him	✘ No
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/david-petraeus-general-surge-401740.html	its a major newspaper	listed as green on WP:RSP	Article is about him	✔ 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 - couple of things, if the VF article was one of only 2, I wouldn't count it. Anonymous sources are problematic. Although in the past 4 or 5 years they've become more and more prevalent. Second, I've notice that several of your responses are the exact verbiage, or very close to another one of the folks who went through NPP school. While it's fine to use other references, I think you'll be better served in the long run if you don't look at the other NPP responses. This part of the NPP SCHOOL is about learning, not about being right. And sometimes you can learn more from an incorrect answer than a correct one. Anyway, that's just my perspective. You're doing very well so far. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:15, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

---

11

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/	published by her (or more likely her PR team)	published by her, no oversight	all about her	✘ No
https://www.latimes.com/sports/more/la-sp-us-open-hingis-20170910-story.html	Appears to be a major newssite, no reason to suspect a COI	Its a major newspaper	From the small part I can see before I hit a paywall and the title I'm assuming its about her only	✔ Yes
https://books.google.com.my/books?id=4x3fQ920EUMC&pg=PA197&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false	not published by her, no reason to suspect a COI	University of Nebraska Press where Potomac books seems to be a part of appears to by a reputable printing house	Searching the book with this search query only reveals passing mentions	✘ No
https://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/id/21171438/tennis-another-twist-bizarre-career-martina-hingis	Appears to be a major sports channel	Appears to be reliable	Article is entirely about her	✔ Yes
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2007/nov/01/tennis	The Guardian is a reputable newspaper, no COI apparent	Listed as green on WP:RSP	Article is about her	✔ 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 - spot on. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:15, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

---

12

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	Don't see any indication of a COI	Under WP:DAILYMAIL the Mail online is deprecated as source, except for ABOUTSELF cases.	Article is entirely about him	✘ No
http://stats.allblacks.com/asp/Profile.asp?ABID=1108	Website appears to be owned by the team who he plays for, they have a COI	While it is a WP:BIASED source, based on the claims it is supporting I'm going to say its reliable	Whole page is about him	✘ No
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/warriors-league-team/news/article.cfm?c_id=360&objectid=10399308	Its an interview without editorial oversight, but based on the mentions in the interview I don't suspect a direct COI	Its an interview without editorial oversight	He is mentioned exactly twice in the article, and thats in one answer	✘ No
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/10/01/1096527943523.html	Appears to be a major newspaper, although something about it feels vaguely promotional and I'm slightly suspicious by the lack of a author.	Major newspaper, appears to have editorial oversight	Article is about him and another person.	✔ 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 - and you see what you said about WP:BIASED regarding allblacks.com? And how that ties back into the FLW article in the first example? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:15, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

---

Questions

Question 13

Now that we've covered sources, can you apply your knowledge of GNG and SNGs? For each of the above subjects assessed in the previous section, please identify whether they meet notability guidelines (and how/why), based solely on the sources included on this page (i.e. don't go looking for more sources)

1. Frank Lloyd Wright

Based on what I can see above and a quick skim through its Wikipedia article I'm going to assume The Guggenheim makes him qualify under at least WP:NARCHITECT #4 (and probably also #3, but I can't see that directly from the sources, although "His notoriety and genius inspired countless biographies, several novels and, peripherally, a pop song" makes me suspect it very hard. The text in the sources makes me think he also passes #3 of NARCHITECT. Clearly notable

Y - meets #1 as well. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:53, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

1. Jordan Lennon

Not sure if he's notable. The article as it stands makes me think he hasn't yet produced any significant films not starred in any, which probably means he can't make WP:NACTOR or WP:NFILMMAKER. The sources in the exercise also don't seem enough to make him meet notable. GNG fail, SNG fail

Y - not notable. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:53, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

1. David Petraeus

There doesn't appear to be a SNG for generals (WP:NSOLDIER seems to suggest there used to be something but that it was deprecated). He might meet WP:NPOL having been the director of the CIA? Not sure if that falls under holders of a national office. I'm also not seeing any evidence of meeting WP:NBIO in the sources. Since I think thats all the SNG's he falls under that probably means falling back to GNG, under which he is notable.

Y - before NSOLDIER was deprecated (a mistake in my opinion), he would have qualified under that. The director of the CIA would not qualify under NPOL, so he doesn't meet any SNG's, but definitely qualifies under GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:53, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

1. Martina Hingis

Clearly notable under WP:NTENNIS #3, possibly #6? The book mentions her holding a record, and the context makes me think it would have been recognised but I'm not 100% sure.

Y - She also meets #1 (it's in the lead), #2 (8-time Fed Cup participant), #5 (although I expected her to have more than a couple of appearances), and #6 with several records. She is not eligible for #4, since that series is for men only. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:53, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

1. Sonny Bill Williams

Notable under at least WP:NRU #1, possibly WP:RLN #3?

Y - yup to both.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:53, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Evaluating sources in the wild

Without consulting any existing Wikipedia consensuses, such as those listed at WP:RSP, WP:NPPSG or WP:RSN, assess whether the following sources are reliable. You may refer to Wikipedia articles for the publications if they exist. Be specific as to how and why you came to your conclusions. Sources are often reliable for some content and unreliable for other content: identify what sorts of articles may have reliable and unreliable coverage from a given source, and consider using examples from their website to illustrate your points. Feel free to offer topic-scoped assessments such as "likely reliable for claims related to pop culture" or "reliable for non-political subject matter".

14 The Moscow Times

Based on their Wikipedia article they seem to be a independent newspaper with editorial oversight, so no immediate COI suspicions. Based on a quick skim through a few articles [1], [2], [3] and [4] I'm also not seeing a clear bias against any specific side, and they link to some of their source material, which I always consider a plus. I would say its reliable.

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:36, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

15 USA Today

The few articles I skimmed through ([5], [6], [7], [8]) suggest no apparent COI or POV. Combined with their solid mentions of which sources they used in their articles (especially notable in the racial disparities chart one), their inline notes and from reading their Wikipedia article (" It has been shown to maintain a generally centrist audience, in regards to political persuasion" (further cementing my believe they have no massive POV), "One unique feature of the USA Today editorial page is the publication of opposing points of view; alongside the editorial board's piece on the day's topic runs an opposing view by a guest writer, often an expert in the field" (So their showing different opinions)) all make me think the USA Today is a reliable source.

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:36, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

16 The Hindu

Seems reliable. The Wikipedia article mentions it being a newspaper of record, the few article I looked at ([9], [10], [11] and [12] don't seem to show a COI or POV. I would say reliable

Y - be careful of Indian newspapers (as well as African newspapers). They can be subject to churnalism, where they simply regurgitate press releases as news articles. This is very prevalent amongst business and entertainment articles. Outside those topics, they are generally reliable. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:36, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

17 Anadolu Agency

Its a state-run news agency, which means it probably has a COI/POV to matters related to politics. Considering its Wikipedia article states "Anadolu Agency is often described as being a propaganda machine for the Turkish government, creating positive stories on Turkey and the Justice and Development Party." I would say its unreliable for anything the Turkish government has a POV on (most things). On the other hand I'm not seeing anything that marks it as immediately suspicious for topics on which the government might not have a POV on (sports as a example).

Y - almost always unreliable. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:36, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

18 Popular Mechanics

I'm not seeing an indication of a COI on their about page nor anything suspicious on their Wikipedia page. There appears to be editorial oversight, and their about page mentions specifically that they check their articles give safe advice. Spot checking a few articles the content appears to be all written by their staff. I would say reliable.

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me}

19 South China Morning Post

Wikipedia articles mentions it being the newspaper of record, no indication of COI, article I skimmed seem fine, I would say reliable

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:36, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

20 Seventeen

Not sure, reads a bit tabloidy to me. Headlines are just a bit too attention grabbing. They also appear to reprint articles from other news sources in full, which can also be a bit iffy depending on who they decide to copy. I would say its usable, but exercise caution.

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:36, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

21 Egypt Today

Appears to be reliable, no indication of a COI/POV, has editorial oversight, can't see anything which suggest it wouldn't be reliable

Y - I would lean reliable, but can suffer from churnalism. Have to be careful with it. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:36, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

22 Xconomy

Their About page, [13] reads like a massive PR/puff piece. I checked their Wikipedia article and they do appear to be independent of any particular company. Their articles read a bit like press releases, and one article read almost like it was just lifted from the conclusion of a scientific article. Use with caution, if at all.

Y - spot on. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:36, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

23 Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung

Reliable, its a well known reliable newspaper with clear editorial oversight.

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:36, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

24 Blesk

Appears to be a tabloid, juicy headlines using a excessive amount of exclamations, heavy photo use. I would say unreliable

Y, although can be used in very specific situations, if researched properly. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:36, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

25 La Jornada

Nothing untoward as far as I can see. Appears to be an independent newspaper with editorial oversight. reliableMost

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:36, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

26 The Forward

Not seeing anything out of the ordinary. As it is a Jewish site, and prominently display the fact it is I searched for a few article about Palestine which all seemed NPOV. I'm going to say reliable.

Y - use with caution. They have issues with reliability, but try to be objective. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:36, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

27 The Daily Californian

Its student-run which always is a bit iffy in my opinion, on the other hand the articles are well written and there appears to be editorial oversight. I'm going to say reliable.

N - student publications, even when they read "independent" are rarely considered independent. They can be used for certain instances, but never for notability, or for claims which are subject to intepritation (e.g. "best hostel", "first fraternity...", etc.). Most are not this difficult, they are almost always non-independent, but there are a handful, this one included, which purport to independence. But when your facilities are given to you by the institution you report on, how independent can you be? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:36, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

@Onel5969: Done with these, sorry for the wait was away for most of last week. -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 13:56, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

No worries, said it would be at your pace. And I meant it. My apologies to not getting back to you yesterday, not sure where you're located, but in the US, we have a holiday called "Mothers' Day", so I spent it with my 90 year old mother. Am just now getting caught up. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:36, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

---

Content Policy

Article titles

Please read WP:TITLE and answer the questions below

1. Article name "Hannibal Barca" - Does the article name need to be change? 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:

Name needs to be changed to Hannibal per WP:COMMONNAME, Hannibal is the overwhelming common name used. This also complies with WP:CONCISE, and falls under WP:SINGLENAME, which is part of the people naming conventions. While I can see people arguing that Hannibal should instead be an disambiguation page, in my opinion Hannibal Barca is the overwhelming WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 17:13, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Y - spot on. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:58, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

---

2. Article name "Magic Johnson". Does the article name need to be change? 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:

Probably okay under WP:COMMONAME? WP:NCBASE states "Nicknames should only be used when a player went by their nickname professionally instead of their given first name." which I can't find in the sources provided, but also states "Informally, the name that appeared on a player's baseball cards should serve as the article's title." which a quick Google search seems to confirm happened. So I'd say keep it where it is, per WP:COMMONNAME and possibly WP:NCBASE if a source can be found to prove he played professionally under that name. -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 17:13, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Y - nice job. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:58, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

---

Biographies of living persons

Please read WP:BLP and answer the questions below.

3. Please explain if the content of the below text 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:

This is a BLP, so the the TMZ and RT sources shouldn't be used to draw content from per WP:BLPRS and even their inclusion is questionable. On the other hand the incident is also covered in the last three sources, which are reliable, so just refactor that paragraph to only draw from those sources. The last paragraph needs to go, its unsourced, which violates WP:BLPRS, negatively written ("bedded") and has WP:BLPNAME issues (it also has a typo, but thats beside the point). I'm also concerned about WP:WEIGHT, cutting out the last paragraph means the bar incident gets the same weight as his entire MMA career which it shouldn't but not much which can be done there without more sources. -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 11:48, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Y - nice job. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:09, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

---

4. Please explain if the content of the below text 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:

Most of this article seems to be fine, no contentious claims, libel or attack. The phone number and address are a violation of WP:BLPPRIVACY so edit those out with an summary of something like "blp", email Oversight with a link to the page and potentially drop a note on the talk page of the editor who added it after Oversight replies (after just in case someone is watching that talk page so I don't draw attention to the offending content. Probably overkill, but no real reason why not so might as well.) -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 11:48, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:09, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

---

Images copyright

Please read Wikipedia:Image use policy and Wikipedia:Public domain image resources. Please answer the questions below and (1) provide an explanation based on Wikipedia guidelines and (2) provide the guidelines/links in your answer.

5. Could this image-1 be uploaded into C:Main Page and used in Wikipedia? and why?

Answer- Explanation:

Probably yes, its a work made by a member of the US military in what I'm guessing is a professional capacity based on the image, which makes it a work by the US GOV, which under US law are ineligible for copyright and therefore PD. -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 07:44, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Y - definitely yes. The key is the fact that it's on the US DoD website. All US federal .gov websites are free to use. But not all .gov, there are some states which retain copyright (like AZ where I live). Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:11, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

@Onel5969: the reason I included probably and the rest of my reasoning is because their Imagery use page states that "However, some of the DoD VI available on this publicly accessible website may be subject to copyright or other intellectual property rights owned by non-DoD parties, regardless of whether the VI is marked with a copyright notice or other indication of non-DoD ownership or interests. Any use of this DoD VI other than as expressly authorized in this notice may subject the user to legal liability, including liability to such non-DoD owners of intellectual property or other protectable legal interests.", [14], which seems to indicate to me that there is the possibilty of copyrighted material on that website, even though it is a .gov website -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 11:56, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Answer - link/guideline:

Wikipedia:Public domain#US government works, policy about using us gov works on Wikipedia, c:COM:PD, Commons policy on Public Domain images.

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:11, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

6. Could this image-2 be uploaded into C:Main Page and used in Wikipedia? Why?

Answer- Explanation:

Yes, the source of that image is [15], which is marked as CC0, so its public domain and we can freely use it. -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 07:44, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:11, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Answer - link/guideline:

Wikipedia:Image use policy#Public domain, policy about public domain use on Wikipedia, c:COM:PD, Commons policy on Public Domain images.

Y - you can also find the same poliy at WP:IUPC. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:11, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

7. Could this image-3 be uploaded into C:Main Page and used in Wikipedia? Why?

Answer- Explanation:

Well its already on Commons, which makes live easier. As the copyright tag on Commons points out the Pixabay terms of service states that images on Pixabay are released under CC0, and since the source of that image, [16], was on Pixabay its in the public domain. -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 07:44, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Y - yup, good honing in on the Commons factor. That is usually golden, but be careful if it's a newer creation on Commons, they might have discovered the copyright issue yet. But if it's been on there over 6 months, that's a safe bet. And yes, the true underlying policy is CC0.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:11, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Answer - link/guideline:

Wikipedia:Image use policy#Public domain, policy about public domain use on Wikipedia, c:COM:PD, Commons policy on Public Domain images.

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:11, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

8. Could this image-4 be uploaded into C:Main Page and used in Wikipedia? Why?

Answer- Explanation:

No, the image itself doesn't mention any form of copyright that I can see, at which point we must assume its copyrighted and therefore can't be uploaded to Commons, per c:Commons:Licensing. It could be used on Wikipedia if a user can prove it satisfies the WP:NFCC policy, but I doubt it. -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 07:44, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Y - there actually is a copyright notice at the bottom of the page, which covers all content on the page. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:11, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Answer - link/guideline:

c:Commons:Licensing, WP:NFCC

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:11, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

9 Certain types of images are a giveaway of COI and/or paid editing, despite not being direct violations of our image policies. Can you guess what kinds of images these are?

High quality images of the articles subject, marked as own work are a dead giveaway of COI/paid editing -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 07:44, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:11, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

---

Neutral point of view

Please read WP:NPOV and MOS:PUFF. Point out the WP:NPOV words/pharses and rewrite the paragraph in Questions 9& 10 from a neutral point of view.

10. She is a brilliant boxer with a rare and exceptional beauty. She turned Pro at the age of 19 after winning one amateur fight on December 14, 2013 where she destroyed her opponent in 20 seconds. Her talent and marketability made her a fighter to watch right out the gate and she fought under XXX promotion on her next fight on February 2014. Answer:

"brilliant", "rare and exceptional beauty", "destroyed her opponent", "Her talent and marketability"

She is a boxer. She become a professional boxer at the age of 19 after having won a amateur fight on December 14, 2013, in which she beat her opponent in 20 seconds. She is currently promoted by XXX.

Y - nice. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:09, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

11. He is a popular, acclaimed Bulgarian actor, who loves by all who have watched his films. He was born in Veliko Tarnovo and started working in the film industry since he was at the tender, innocent of the age of 14 and he has featured in 44 films. Answer:

"who loves by all" (isn't it who is beloved by all), "tender, innocent age"

He is a popular and acclaimed Bulgarian actor. He was born in Veliko Tarnovo and started working in the film industry at the age of 14. He has featured in 44 films.

Y, although I'd go further: "He is a Bulgarian actor." Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:09, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

12. Please read WP:DUE and in your own words, please explain why it is important to provide balance and due weight content in an article. Answer:

If we give undue weight to one particular viewpoint, instead of weighting the prominence of each viewpoint against its mention in Reliable Sources, we give the impression that that viewpoint is more widely held/more true than other viewpoints, without that being the truth, which could mislead the reader of the article.

Y, spot on. Keep in mind, this can also be focused on what is or is not included in an article's lead. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:09, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

---

Extra neutrality practice

For the following paragraphs, identify if they need any edits for neutrality, and if so, draft a corrected version of the paragraph.

1. Goessling is member of the Cancer Genetics Program and the Gastrointestinal Malignancies Program, both at the Dana-Farber/Harvard Cancer Center. He is also advisory dean of the Irving M. London Society for HST students. He has been hailed for his accessbility, compassion and knowledge and his remarkable patient care, even while he has had to fight against his own aggressive malignancy.

Note: Unless you have a subscription to Süddeutsche Zeitung, you're not going to be able to read the entirety of source #4 (and you'll likely need to use Google Translate either way). Translate what you can, and make an educated guess as to whether it justifies the provided content.

Goessling is a member of the Cancer Genetics Program and the Gastrointestinal Malignancies Program, both at the Dana-Farber/Harvard Cancer Center. He is also advisory dean of the Irving M. London Society for HST students..

The soundcloud source is dead, and what little I could grab from the article didn't seem to support the last sentence. -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 10:24, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

References

Y - spot on. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:09, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

2. Nathaniel Coleman (born January 1, 1997) is an American sport climber. He became the first American male climber to qualify to compete in the Olympic Games after advancing to the final at IFSC Combined Qualifier Toulouse 2019 in November–December, 2019. Coleman won three straight USA Climbing Bouldering Open National Championships, from 2016 to 2018, and finished 2nd in the 2019 competition. He also finished second in the 2019 Combined Invitational.

Everything seems NPOV here, although I will point out that the birth date doesn't seem to be supported by any sources, and needs a source or be taken out. Apart from that this article seems fine in its current state. -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 10:24, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

References

Y - nice catch on the birthdate, not sure if it's in any of the article's ref's, but if it isn't, it should be removed. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:09, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

3. The Disque Foundation is a 501(c)(3) Nonprofit created by Dr. Karl "Fritz" Disque in 2012 in response to a medical mission trip to Hati during the 2010 earthquake. The goal of the Disque Foundation is to further advance the quality of education and health care to under served communities both domestic and abroad. Through mission work and free online courses, the Disque Foundation has empowered over 1,000,000 people around the world with life saving skills.

The Disque Foundation is a non-profit organization, created by Dr. Karl "Fritz" Disque in 2012 in response to a medical mission trip to Hati during the 2010 earthquake. The stated mission of the Disque Foundation is to provide free cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and advanced life support training.. In January 2019 it announced it had trained over 1 million people.

Just a comment from me, the sourcing on this is really poor, and I'm not really convinced any of them are RS. -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 13:20, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

References

Y - nice. You're right about the referencing, it's been deleted. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:09, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

4. Patrick John Harrington, QC is a Welsh criminal law barrister and Queen's Counsel. He has acted in more than 250 homicide trials, and has been noted for work on some of "the largest and most complex fraud cases in the UK". He has been referred to as one of Wales' "most prominent" lawyers.

Seems fine, statements are attributed where necessary

References

Y - although be careful, even though they are quotes, it still might point to NPOV. It can be easy to find quotes either pro or con about a particular subject. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:09, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

5. Danielle and Jennifer grew up Harleysville, Pennsylvania and started out in the entertainment industry at very young ages. Danielle was the first to get the acting bug and Jennifer was soon to follow. Danielle started acting at the age of 5 and landed her first commercial at the age of 6. Danielle's talent was soon recognized and she secured a role on Broadway in Les Miserables at the age of just 7 years old. Danielle is also a member of The Broadway Kids and can be heard on their latest album, "Hey Mr. DJ!". Jennifer was of course wasn't far behind and landed starring roles in Law & Order:SVU, Law & Order: CI and All My Children. Both sisters have a long list of voice-over credentials including voice-over characters in Blue's Clues, and jingles for (Hess Truck(Spanish), Curad, Charmin, Pepsi). They have been seen in TV commercials as well such as Wendy's, Ethan Allen, ASPCA, AT&T, and Monster.com. Danielle has performed in the 2003 Off-Broadway musical "The Alchemists". Danielle and Jennifer shared the stage in the Off-Broadway shows "A" for Adultery and The House of Bernarda Alba.

5. Danielle and Jennifer grew up Harleysville, Pennsylvania and started out in the entertainment industry at very young ages. Danielle started acting at the age of 5 and landed her first commercial at the age of 6. She secured a role on Broadway in Les Miserables at the age of just 7 years old. Danielle is also a member of The Broadway Kids and can be heard on their latest album, "Hey Mr. DJ!". Jennifer landed starring roles in Law & Order:SVU, Law & Order: CI and All My Children. Both sisters have a long list of voice-over credentials including voice-over characters in Blue's Clues, and jingles for (Hess Truck(Spanish), Curad, Charmin, Pepsi). They have also acted in TV commercials such as Wendy's, Ethan Allen, ASPCA, AT&T, and Monster.com. Danielle performed in the 2003 Off-Broadway musical "The Alchemists". Danielle and Jennifer shared the stage in the Off-Broadway shows "A" for Adultery and The House of Bernarda Alba.

 Comment: @Onel5969:, I've tried my best with the content here, but I don't have anything to work with qua references. I can't access the first ref cause GDPR issues as I live in Europe, the second one has no content, the numbers 3-5 are all broken/dead links, number 6 and 7 have no content, number 8 is dead and number 9 also contains basically no content except to verify one appearance.

(fix ping @Onel5969: -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 13:21, 16 May 2021 (UTC))

References

Y, remember this was an exercise of NPOV, not sourcing. Here's the refinement I would suggest (sans refs):

Danielle and Jennifer grew up Harleysville, Pennsylvania. Danielle started acting at the age of 5 and landed her first commercial at the age of 6. She secured a role on Broadway in Les Miserables at the age of 7 years old. Danielle is also a member of The Broadway Kids and can be heard on their latest album, "Hey Mr. DJ!". Both sisters have voice-over credentials including voice-over characters in Blue's Clues, and jingles for (Hess Truck(Spanish), Curad, Charmin, Pepsi). They have also acted in TV commercials such as Wendy's, Ethan Allen, ASPCA, AT&T, and Monster.com. Danielle performed in the 2003 Off-Broadway musical "The Alchemists". Danielle and Jennifer shared the stage in the Off-Broadway shows "A" for Adultery and The House of Bernarda Alba. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:09, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

No original research

Please read WP:OR and WP:NOT and answer the questions below

13. In your own words, why is Wikipedia not a platform for publishing original research?

Answer:

Because if we allowed OR into articles we would be unable to verify the content, which would mean we would be unable to meet WP:V, and it would allow editors to insert their own conclusions, and therefore their own point of view on a subject, which would make it much more likely that articles would fail NPOV. -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 08:02, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:42, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

14. In your own words, please provide one example with explanation when it is appropriate to insert an original content or synthesis in an article.

Answer:

Inserting an subjects age, based on a clearly verifiable birth date supported by RS, where the RS doesn't provide the age. This kind of basic math is allowed under WP:CALC. -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 08:02, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Y - another big one is the plot sections in films or books. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:42, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

15. See this video and write an article paragraph that properly presents claims supported by the source. Assume that Alsuleiman's opinions are DUE for inclusion as part of this response.

Answer:

When asked whether women where allowed to wear jeans, Alsuleiman stated that Muslim clothing must be loose, baggy, and can't have attractive colors. Regarding jeans Alsuleiman stated they cannot be a 100% fit.

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:42, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

References

Verifiability

Please read WP:V and answer the questions below

16. In your own words, why does content in Wikipedia need to be verified?

Because (tying back into the previous section) we would be unable to check if the content is the opinion of every scientist on Earth, or something I just thought up two seconds ago. Verifiability allows any editor to check that the content is factual and supported by RS, and prevents OR and hoaxes from becoming part of the encyclopieda.

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:41, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

17. If the subject has two sons and it is supported by three independent, reliable sources but in reality he has 3 sons. Could we change the content from "2" sons to "3 sons"? and why?

No. Wikipedia doesn't tell the truth (tm), we say what RS says. It doesn't matter if I know the subject personally and during a visit yesterday counted his sons and found three, unless reliable sources states that he has three sons we can't include it. -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 15:57, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:41, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

18. Looking at Saint-Germain River, the article cites two references. Please explain if you feel that the information in the article is acceptable as per WP:VERIFY.

No. The first citation appears to just link to a map of Canada, with no further information given, and doesn't support any content sourced to it (most of the article). The second source seems to suffer from potential WP:PRIMARY concerns, but otherwise does support the section sourced to it. -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 15:57, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Y - spot on. I used this example on purpose, because this was a big discussion amongst several NPP editors several months ago. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:41, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Filtering - Criteria for speedy deletion

PART 2

We have looked at the requirements needed for a page to meet notability guidelines, content policies and the types of sources needed to merit a page in Wikipedia in Part 1 (Assignment 1, 2 & 3). In assignment 4, we look at what type of articles need to be filtered out from our system when reviewing a page. There are many criteria of WP:Criteria for speedy deletion. Here we discuss (1) General criteria (G1-G14), (2) Article criteria (A1-A11) and R2.

Please do the following

1. Please set up your CSD log by installing MYCSD so that I can review your CSD nominations. After saving, you have to bypass your browser's cache to see the changes - see instruction at Wikipedia:Bypass your cache.
2. Bookmark Earwig's Copyvio Detector in your computer.
3. Install CV-revdel. After saving, you may have to bypass your browser's cache to see the changes - see instruction at Wikipedia:Bypass your cache.

General criteria

1. Please review (G1-G14) at General and answer the following questions in your own words. When providing examples, be specific

No	Criterion	Application	Example	Mentor comments
1	G1	Pages consisting of only text and gibberish, where the page is not understandable.	A page consisting only of "atyesxtcivuybhlinjmafsdgfhgn cdszdvxfbcgnffb dv"	Y Onel5969 TT me 03:50, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
2	G2	Pages which were created only to test a specific feature of Wikipedia, where the page is not the Sandbox or in the user namespace	A page consisting of "Can I edit this? Bold Italic Computer code Small test test"	Y Onel5969 TT me 03:50, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
3	G3	Pages which are either indisputable vandalism, or an obvious and blatant hoax. Also applies to hoax files, and redirects created by page-move vandalism.	The Mainpage is moved to "Wikipedia sucks and is the worst website out there", and its then moved back leaving a redirect. This redirct is eligible for G4	Y - doesn't have to be a page move however, simply creating a page which says "Wikipedia sucks and is the worst website out there" would also qualify. However, the redirect would not qualify under G4, having not been the subject of a deletion discussion. Onel5969 TT me 03:50, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
4	G4	Pages deleted per a deletion discussions, where a almost exactly same page was recreated. Excludes PROD, CSD, deletion discussions closed as soft delete because of no quorum, and content undeleted via a deletion review	A AFD is closed as delete with quorum. Two days later the original creator recreates the exact same page.	Y - although the time frame is irrelevant. 2 days or 12 years, doesn't matter. However, if you look at the article, and there appears to be significant occurrences subsequent to the AfD, then this wouldn't apply. For example, an AfD happened in 2017 to an actress, who at that time had only been in a single film. In 2018, 19 and 20 she had starring roles in 3 other films... that would not be a good G4 candidate. However, a person or company which had been deleted in 2012, and there is nothing in the article beyond 2012, that would be a good candidate for G4. Let me know if you need further explanation on this. Onel5969 TT me 03:50, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
5	G5	Any page created in violation of a users ban/block, where there were no other substantial edits and the page was created during the duration of their block/ban. For pages created by sockpuppets this applies to any pages created by sockpuppets after the start of the users earliest block/ban	A user gets blocked, creates a sockpuppet and using that sockpuppet creates a new page. This new page is now eligble for G5, unless another editor substantially edits it.	Y, although remember the page created by the puppet has to be created after the block/ban. Often, the socks are created prior to the ban, so if there are articles created during that time frame, they would not be eligible. Onel5969 TT me 03:50, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
6	G6	Uncontroversial maintenance, such as dated empty maintenance categories, pages which block a move and pages obviously created in error.	The Category "Spam articles created in May 2006" has been emptied out.	Y - one of the most frequent uses of this is to request redirects be deleted which are holding up page moves. Onel5969 TT me 03:50, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
7	G7	Pages where the sole author requests deletion, or the sole author blanks the page (excluding userspace pages, category pages, or any type of talk page)	The sole author of the page blanks it with the summary "please delete this page"	Y Onel5969 TT me 03:50, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
8	G8	Pages which dependent on non-existent pages, where the page is not useful.	A page tagged as G11 gets deleted, but the admin doesn't delete the talk page, which contains nothing useful.	Y - perfect example. Onel5969 TT me 03:50, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
9	G9	Deletions carried out by the Foundation as a Office action, probably using the WMFOficce account	Whatever the Foundation wants to delete in principle. Not sure of a good example.	Y - although I've never actually seen one of these. Onel5969 TT me 03:50, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
10	G10	Pages which serve solely to attack a entity in some capacity, where there is no neutral version to revert to. Also applies to BLP pages which are entirely negative or unsourced.	A unsourced BLP which calls its subject a terrorist and pedophile.	Y Onel5969 TT me 03:50, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
11	G11	Pages which are unambiguous advertisement, spam or promotion of a entity, where it would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to fix the issue.	A page is created with this text "Asartea INC products are the BEST Products and EVERYBODY should have them! Buy them at asartea/store.com	Y Onel5969 TT me 03:50, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
12	G12	Pages which contain copyrighted content, where there is no content worth saving on the page that isn't a copyright violation, and no non-infringing revision to revert to.	A user copies the homepage of a companies website into a draft article and then publishes it. (Note: this page would probably also fall under G11)	Y - It depends on how much of the article is a copyvio. Sometimes I'll G12 a page which 90% of the article is copyrighted, and sometimes the admin will delete, sometimes they'll simply cut out the copyrighted portion and revdel. For lesser amounts of copyright infringement, I remove the portion which is a copyvio and ask for a revdel. For example, quite a few film articles are fine, except for the plot, which has been copied from imdb or some other source. I'll remove the plot, but let the rest of the article stand. Onel5969 TT me 03:50, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
13	G13	Articles in draftspace, userspace with the AFC submission template, or userspace containing only the default Article Wizard text, which haven't been edited by a human in 6 months	An IP created a article in draftspace over 6 months ago, and no edits have been made since the page creation.	Y - although it doesn't have to be an ip. And it is just six months since the last edit. In other words, a draft gets worked on by an editor (ip or otherwise) and gets submitted and declined 3 times over 7 months. Finally the draft is abandoned. after 6 months after the last edit, it's eligible for G13. Onel5969 TT me 03:50, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
14	G14	Pages which end in (disambiguation) but only disambiguate to one existing article, pages which disambiguate to 0 existing articles and redirects ending in (disambiguation) which do not redirect to a disambiguation page.	A page called Asartea (disambiguation), which disambiguates only to Asartea	Y (nice example ) Onel5969 TT me 03:50, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

Article and redirect criteria

1. Please review A1-A11, R2, and R3 criteria at WP:CSD#List of criteria and answer the following questions in your own words. When providing examples, be specific.

No	Criterion	Application	Example	Mentor comments
1	A1	Articles where it is impossible to guess either the subject, or the apparent subject is very common and the article doesn't give the context to understand which one is meant (per Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion/Archive 60#Rfc regarding A1)	A article with the title "John" and the text "He is a very funny person with a big house and a car"	Y. But remember if you are reviewing from the front of the queue, to wait at least 10-15 minutes, before tagging these. While your example would warrant immediate tagging, there are some which a new editor might start, and it looks like this, but it could be something they are working on to flesh out. Onel5969 TT me 02:29, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
2	A2	Articles in another language than English, where the article already exists on the Wikipedia for that language.	A article called "Victoria van het Verenigd Koninkrijk" is created with the text "Alexandrina Victoria van Hannover was een koningin van het Verenigd Koninkrijk en de keizerin van India". wmnl:Victoria van het Verenigd Koninkrijk already exists, and there is nothing in this snippet that isn't in that article.	Y Onel5969 TT me 02:29, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
3	A3	Articles which contain no encyclopedic content at all, such as but not limited to: external links, categories, tags, article wizard framework, any form of chatting, templates or images.	A page is created with as only content [[Category:Content]], [[Category:British people]]	Y Onel5969 TT me 02:29, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
5	A5	Any article which has been moved to another project and the author information properly written down on the new wiki (to avoid copyright issues)	A dictionary definition of "and" has been created and then moved to Wiktionary, where the author information has been recorded.	Y Onel5969 TT me 02:29, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
7	A7	Any article about a real person, individual animal, commercial or non-commercial organization, web content, or organized event which contains no credible claim of significance, independent of whether or not the claim is properly sourced and/or qualifies under the notability guidelines.	A article called John where the content is "John Edwards is a funny comedian".	Y. Although remember they can be pretty substantial articles as well. COI/UPE created articles may fall into this category. There was one article about 6 months ago, which was very lengthy and had 20-30 sources. However, all the sources were either from primary or non-reliable sources. Also remember that significance is a lower bar than notability. For instance, a person might be the mayor of a 70,000 person town, which would be a claim to significance, but they might not be notable. In those instances you should prod/afd the article. Onel5969 TT me 02:29, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
9	A9	Articles about musical recordings/lists of musical recordings, where none of the artists have a article, and there is indication of significance or importance.	A article with the title "Asartea's singles" which contains nothing but a list of singles.	Y - as long as there is no article about a singer name Asartea. If there is, a redirect is appropriate. Onel5969 TT me 02:29, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
10	A10	Newly created articles where the topic already has a article, the new article contains no useful content, it isn't a plausible redirect, the page isn't a disambugation page and isn't the result of a page split.	The article "Mainpage" is created with as content "this is the mainpage of Wikipedia"	Y - you'll especially see articles like this towards the end of terms at universities/colleges. I had one just yesterday or the day before, Tamashi2314/Feminine hygiene, even though it wasn't a duplicate of Feminine hygiene, it was about the same subject. Sometimes in these instances, there is enough new material in new article, that I'll draftify it, and contact the editor and tell them to improve the existing article. However, that's not the usual case. Onel5969 TT me 02:29, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
11	A11	Articles where the subject was clearly discovered, coined or invented by the creator or a close acquaintance, and where the article does not contain a credible claim of significance, independent of whether or not the claim is properly sourced and/or qualifies under the notability guidelines, and the article isn't a hoax	A article where the only text is "Asartea's chess strategy is a chess strategy I discovered yesterday"	Y Onel5969 TT me 02:29, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
12	R2	Redirects from the (Article) namespace to a different namespace that isn't Category:, Template:, Wikipedia:, Help: or Portal:, and broken redirects which if they were to be fixed would qualify.	A redirect from the (Article) namespace to Draft:Example/test.	Y - that's the most common occurrence. Until you have the pagemover right, anytime you draftify an article, you'll need to do this to the redirect left behind. The pagemover right allows you to move a page without leaving a redirect. Onel5969 TT me 02:29, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
13	R3	Recently created redirects which are implausible typo's/misnomers of the article they redirect to, excluding redirects left behind from page moves, unless the moved article was also recently created	A page called "Asartea's favorite page" which redirects to the Main Page	Y, but see my follow up question below. Onel5969 TT me 02:29, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Follow up question to R3 above: Say you come across an implausible typo on a redirect, but it was created back in 2008? This doesn't happen often in NPP (usually its an editor actually looking for bad redirects), but occasionally it will come up at the back of the queue. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:29, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

@Onel5969: tag it with a PROD with explanation at first, and if that gets removed without a explanation convincing me I was wrong it was a implausible typo take it to RFD.

Hi. While that is certainly acceptable, most NPP reviewers would most likely take it directly to RfD. Saves a step, and a little bit of time.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:29, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Scenarios

For scenarios 1-3, 9, 11-13, and 15-19 all names are made-up and should not be looked up outside of the training environment; the rest may be searched. These can be broken up into multiple practice sets so as to not overwhelm the trainee.

Scenario 1

A user with the username "BobSucks" creates an article called "John Smith" that contains solely the following text:

John Smith is the worst elementary school teacher on the planet.

Tag with {{Db-negublp}} as a negative unsourced BLP, and possibly report the user to UAA as well.

Y - this is a perfect example of an attack edit/page. It should be tagged G10, or with the template you suggest. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:59, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Scenario 2

A user with the username "GoodTimesLLC" creates a user page with the following text

'''Good Times LLC''' is an organization dedicated to helping your children get the highest quality education at an affordable price. Visit our website at goodtimes.info and contact us at 123-456-7890.

Tag with {{Db-g11}}, and report the user to UAA as a promotional account that implies shared use. If it was a bit longer I'd probably also have run a check on it to see if it was copyvio.

Y - remember, this is regardless of whether or not the organization is notable, so no BEFORE is required. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:59, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Scenario 3

A user creates an article titled "Edward Gordon" with the following text:

'''Edward Gordon''' (born July 1998) is an aspiring American actor and songwriter. So far, he has starred in many school plays and has published two albums on SoundCloud. He has over 500 subscribers on YouTube.

this is tricky, and I'm not sure about this one. In my opinion it does not pass even WP:SIGNIF and I would tag it for A7, but I can see that being opposed.

Y - definitely A7. If opposed, you can then take it to AfD. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:59, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Scenario 4

A user creates an article titled "Bazz Ward" with the following content:

Bazz Ward was a Hall of Fame roadie and I wish he was as well known as Lemmy. Cheers Bazz.

No tags are applicable here. The Hall of Fame claim passes WP:SIGNIF, which excludes the notability criteria, and I can't see any other criteria applying (the only other one I could see being argued is A3, but I don't think this passes the criteria for that)

N - This is another A7. Do a quick check to see if there is an article about the particular hall of fame. If not, then that doesn't meet significance threshhold. Else someone could simply put that they were in the "Anaheim High School hall of fame", or something similar. Rule of thumb is that if there is WP article for the claim, then they might be significant. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:59, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Scenario 5

A user creates an article Marks v. Shoup with the following content:

Under the law of Oregon which was in force in Alaska when the seizure and levy of the plaintiff's goods were made by the defendant as marshal of Alaska under a writ of attachment, that officer could not, by virtue of his writ, lawfully take the property from the possession of a third person, in whose possession he found it.

This appears to be a direct copying of a part US supreme Court case, which doesn't qualify under G12 as it is in the public domain (per Wikipedia:Public domain#US government works. I can't see any CSD criteria which would apply.

Y - I would most likely draftify this, especially if there was only a single source. Not every law is notable, and the text does not give any indication that this law is notable. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:59, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Scenario 6

A user creates an article, but you can't understand any of it because it's in a foreign language.

Run it trough a machine translation, which should help determine which language it is, and if its an actual article. If it is check if the article exists on that languages Wikipedia. If it does and it duplicates that article tag for A5, otherwise tag with {{Not English}}.

Y spot on. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:59, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Live CSD practice

Please read WP:PROMOTION and WP:G11 and provide 5 successful CSD 11 articles you have nominated from Special:NewPagesFeed (New Page Patrol section). Please provide the article names and I will check them at your CSD log. Don't rush this, take all the time you need. When you have 5, I'll check.

Answer i:

Tricog (also the draft of the same name)

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:16, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Answer ii:

Boris Stoyanov

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:16, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Answer iii:

Siri Gautama Sambuddharaja Maligawa, also tagged as a G12.

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:58, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Answer iv:

Y - give me one more. While your speedy of Haroon Kadwani did not result in it being deleted, it was eventually deleted for that reason, so you were spot on there. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:58, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Answer v:

Siri Gautama Sambuddharaja Maligawa, also tagged as a G12. (note: page was recreated with the same content)

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:54, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Answer vi: (bonus since v was kind of cheating)

Edward le Bas (since then recreated, might have been redeleted by the time you see this)

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:54, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Copyright violations

Please read WP:COPYVIO, WP:REVDEL, WP:COPYPASTE, WP:DCM and WP:G12 and answer the questions below.

1. When do we nominate a page for WP:G12 and when do we WP:REVDEL the COPYVIO text?

Answer:

G12 is exclusively for unambiguous copyright violations, where there is no meaningful content outside of the violation and no non infringing revision to revert back to.

Revdel is for cases where there is unambiguous copyright violation, but there is either meaningful content worth saving or a non infringing revision to revert to.

Y - If I review 100 pages a day, there will be at least 5-10 which will fall under this. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:34, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

2. What constitutes copyright infringement/violation.

Answer:

Copying from a source which is not A) published under a compatible license with Wikipedia's CC-BY-SA 3.0 license where all terms of the license have been complied with, B) in the public domain, or C) the user is copying a short quote from the source, where a inline citation has been provided to the source directly, which is allowed under the non free content policy (although what constitutes a short quote is debatable)

Y - your (A) and (B) are spot on. Not sure what you mean in (C). If there is a short quote, which has an inline citation, that's not a CV. If there is a short quote without a footnote, that would be a CV. This also applies to files. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:34, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

3. What are some examples of cases where it is ok to have exact copies of text from sources in an article? Please provide three examples.

Answer i:

Copying from a source which is licensed as CC-BY-SA 3.0, where attribution has been provided, usually by template.

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:34, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Answer ii:

Copying from a source which is in the public domain, such as a good deal of the US government websites.

Y - but remember those are federal US government websites. Most US state websites have copyright restrictions. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:34, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Answer iii:

Using a short quote to illustrate, attribute or contextualize a point of view, provided it isn't too long and a inline citation to the source has been provided directly after the quote.

Y - Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:34, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

6. Why do copyright violations need to be removed from Wikipedia and who determines when a violation is lawfully taking place?

Answer:

Copyright violations need to be removed since copyright is a law, and violations of it are breaking the law. Including these makes redistribution of that page hard/impossible, since anybody reusing would also be violating copyright. It furthermore harms Wikipedias reputation and credibility. Wikipedia in principle follows the laws of the United States of America copyright laws, as that is where the servers that host Wikipedia are located, although per Jimbo Wales we should strive to respect other countries copyright laws as well. The Wikipedia policy which governs this is located at Wikipedia:Copyrights.

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:34, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

---

7. Please read WP:COPYVIO, WP:REVDEL, WP:COPYPASTE, WP:DCM and WP:G12 and provide 5 successful CSD 12 articles you have nominated from Special:NewPagesFeed (New Page Patrol or Article for Creation section). Pls provide the article names and I will check them at your CSD log. You can use Earwig's Copyvio Detector tool to check if an article is in violation of COPYVIO. Take as much time as you need in order to complete this assignment successfully.

Answer i:

Dia Taylor

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:06, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Answer ii:

Draft:List of Melbourne suburbs pronounciations

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:06, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Answer iii:

Draft:Ivan Parvev

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:06, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Answer iv:

Draft:Jake Jurant

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:06, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Answer v:

Draft:Aminoff Suffering Syndrome

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:06, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

---

8. Pls provide 5 successful CSD in any criteria except WP:G11, WP:G12 and WP:G13 articles you have nominated from Special:NewPagesFeed (New Page Patrol "ONLY"). Please provide the article names and I will check them at your CSD log. Take as much time as you need in order to complete this assignment successfully.

Answer i:

Bhago Mohan Pyare; tagged as a G5

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:37, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Answer ii:

David Chambers (songwriter/musician/producer) nominated as G8 as a redirect that when fixed would be eligible as R2, left over from some confused page moving by a new user.

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:41, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Answer iii:

Murder of Ki Suk Han, R2

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:41, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Answer iv:

N U Nachappa, R2

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:41, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Answer v:

Talk:ANUATION as a G8

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:27, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

---

9. Please read WP:R2 and WP:NPPDRAFT. Please explain when to a new page (NPP article) can be nominated for CSD R2 and what should be considered when doing such move?

Answer:

A NPP article can be nominated for CSD R2 deletion when it has been moved to another mainspace, usually to the Draft namespace. Pages can be moved to draftspace if there is a potential merit to the topic, but it currently doesn't meet Wikipedia's standards and there is no evidence that an editor is currently actively improving the article, or in cases where the author of the article has a clear conflict of interest.

Y - nice job. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:22, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

---

10. Please read and A1-A11 and R2 at WP:CSD and and provide 5 successful "Article CSD" articles (with at least two of them are CSD A7) you have nominated from Special:NewPagesFeed (New Page Patrol "ONLY"). Please provide the article names and I will check them at your CSD log. Take as much time as you need in order to complete this assignment successfully.

Answer i CSD A7:

DWJE-FM, also a G4

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:35, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Answer ii CSD A7:

Mahyar Ghaseemi

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:37, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Answer iii CSD R2:

Pran Mohan, which I moved back to User:Pranmohan2322/sandbox, as it only contained {{user sandbox}}.

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:06, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Answer iv CSD R2:

Abu l hasan sharani moved to Draft:Abu l hasan sharani

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:40, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Answer v any criteria:

Karwar Taluka

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:37, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

---

Conflicts of interest and paid editors

Please read WP:NPPCOI, WP:COI and WP:PAID and answer the following question

11. How do we spot a COI/PAID editor?

Answer:

There are a whole bunch of signs to look for. Related usernames are a sign, promotional tone in articles, referring to the subject using the first or second person, GAMING the system, creating a article and then leaving, using high quality images tagged as CC-BY-SA 4.0 own work, which is the default license for commons, using the subject website as a source, using inline external links, perfect articles created in one edit, creating a set of articles on one topic, REFBOMBED articles with redundant sources, and just generally articles that are too good to be true.

Y - one of the key give-aways is the photos used which are "own work". Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:48, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

12. What should you do when you review an NPP article and notice the creator is a COI editor?

Answer:

Unsure. WP:NPPCOI says its in principle allowed, on the other hand WP:COIEDIT says "you should put new articles through the Articles for Creation (AfC) process instead of creating them directly", so I'm unsure which one it is. Even if its allowed the article should be closely looked at, as COI often accompanies POV, copyvio, etc.

Y - cause it is tricky. The first step is to decide whether you think it is UPE, versus simply COI. If it's UPE, draftify, and modify the standard message to include a UPE concern, which should be addressed. If it's COI, tag it for COI, and NPOV if appropriate, and then evaluate like any other article. You could also draftify a COI article. Depends on the level of POV. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:48, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

13. What should you do when you review an NPP article and notice the creator is a paid editor?

Answer:

Assuming its been created by them, move it back to draftspace, as WP:COIEDIT states "you should put new articles through the Articles for Creation (AfC) process instead of creating them directly", which they would be in breach of.

Y - precisely. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:48, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Additional COI practice

For each of the following prompts, identify how likely it is that the described behavior is COI or PAID editing (not COI/unlikely/possible/likely/very likely), as well as what measures would be appropriate to take (both in terms of messages sent to the involved editors and whether to approve/delete/draftify/tag the article). Don't assume any information about the scenarios beyond what is written: if you feel like you would need additional information to provide a proper answer, describe the various outcomes you would consider based on additional hypothetical evidence.

1 An editor makes 10 edits to a variety of articles, then creates an article about an obscure businessperson in a single edit, and does not make any additional edits for 3 months. The article appears to meet notability guidelines.

This is one where I can't give a judgment without further info. Getting exactly enough edits for autoconfirmed, creating an article and then leaving is a sign of GAMING, and obscure businesspersons are a potential COI/PAID target. On the other hand it could also be a newcomer. In order to say something final I would need access to at least a copy of the article + the username of the editor. If the article is not neutrally written/overly promotional, or the username has a link to the subject it is very likely/sure COI/PAID, and I would probably tag it with {{advert}}/ G11 depending on the level of promotional, and run it through the copyvio checker. I wouldn't tag the editor, since they aren't actively editing anymore, and there is a low chance the message would be read. On the other hand if the article doesn't demonstrate any of the COI/PAID signs it probably wasn't COI/PAID

Y - I used to simply tag the article as COI, and then evaluate. However, I've come to learn that this is almost certainly a UPE editor, and now would draftify the article. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:48, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

2 An editor with several hundred edits to a variety of topics makes a new article in a small amount of edits about a new TV show. The article is not neutrally written. Since having finished the article, the editor has continued to make a handful of contributions to other articles.

Unlikely this is COI/PAID. Several hundreds of edits to a variety of topics doesn't suggest an attempt at GAMING, and the continued contributions to different articles also doesn't suggest it. I'd look at their previous edits, and if those also have a tendency towards POV I'd leave them a message about NPOV, and tag the article with {{POV}}.

Y - yup, most likely a fan of whatever they are writing about, so they have difficulty maintaining neutrality. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:48, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

3 An editor makes 10 edits to articles about locations in Georgia, then creates a meticulously sourced article about a species of tree native to Georgia in a single 50,000 byte edit. They have not made any additional edits since then.

Once again 10 edits and then a article is potential GAMING, but all to Georgia could indicate a simple interest in that topic area. A creation of a meticulously article is a sign of COI/PAID, but I'm having a very hard time of thinking of a potential COI in the topic area of tree species native to Georgia. Unless the article is clearly POV/promotional I'd write this of as a new editor simply having read the relevant guidelines and creating a good article.

Y - yeah, the subject matter also matters. Normally UPE articles are about individuals or companies (although they can be about things like films, books, theories... anything which would benefit from promotion). The fact this was about a plant, most likely means it's just a WP editor learning, and they have an interest in all things Georgia. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:48, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

4 An editor with the username "ApuOcalanPKKForever" creates a biography about a Turkish dissident. The article is not neutrally written.

Very likely COI, unlikely PAID. The username + topic + not neutral suggest a COI towards the subject, but its not a topic area in which I would expect PAID edits. Tag the article as {{POV}}, and leave a message on their talkpage explaining NPOV and warning them.

Y - yes, simple case of NPOV. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:48, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

5 A new editor with the username "BillieFan214" writes a non-neutral article about an upcoming Billie Eilish album. They have not made any edits to other articles since completing it

Very likely COI, unlikely PAID. The username suggest a COI, and it lines up with the article subject. Tag the article as {{POV}}, and leave a message on their talkpage explaining NPOV and warning them.

Y - tag it POV, UPE's are rarely that blatant. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:48, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

6 A new editor with the username "BEOfficial" writes an article about an upcoming Billie Eilish album. They have not made any edits to other articles since completing it.

Username is a violation of WP:CORPNAME, so report that to UAA. PAID here is very likely, so warn them for that. Depending on the article content, possibly tag it for G11, and run it trough the copyvio detector.

Y - spot on. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:48, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

7 Over the course of 5 years, an editor writes several articles about a small group of academics and their business ventures. The articles are well-sourced and neutrally written. You've come across their most recent creation, which appears to be notable. Every single article that they've edited in the past five years appears to be somehow related to this group of academics

Likely COI. The focus on a single topic can be an indication of COI, and academics/business ventures are a topic in which I expect there is COI, and possible PAID. On the other hand if all articles are neutrally written and notable it doesn't look like a promotional effort, which is what I would expect in this kind of scenario.

Y - this is the other type of COI editor. More than likely it is someone who has a close connection to the group, and is creating these articles. While not UPE, this is most likely a colleague of those they are writing about, perhaps even one of them. Either tag or draftify. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:48, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

8 An editor with several hundred edits to a variety of topics named "Ismail Oyo" makes a new article about a notable businessperson from Nigeria, and claims the photo in the infobox as their own work.

Really depends. A quick google search doesn't turn up anything interesting for the username, so I'm disregarding it for now. Unless of course the subject is also called that, in which case it indicates a possible/likely COI. Claiming photo's as own work is a possible sign of COI, but I'd really need to see the photo to make a judgement on it. The article is notable, but I'd need to see it to be able to determine whether or not its neutral or not, which could also make a difference.

Y - this could be a simple case of incorrect licensing regarding the photo (someone taking credit for someone else's work), this is one of the key ways to spot COI. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:48, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

9 An editor with 50 edits to a variety of topics is named "StacyRichardson". Included among these edits are the creation of two new articles about businesspeople from Russia. You are reviewing the most recent article, and it does not appear to be notable, although it is neutrally written.

Unlikely COI. Unless I'm missing something the username is unrelated, the articles being spread around topic areas isn't a likely indicator of a COI, unless they're GAMING. Neutrally written also doesn't point to COI. PROD/AFD the article, no action against the user.

N - This is another common tactic of UPE editors, selecting what looks like a "normal" name, especially in the high-COI editing area like businesspeople. The other edits are simple smokescreens. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:48, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

10 An article is moved from draftspace by an editor with less than 50 edits. Previously, the article had only been edited by accounts blocked for sockpuppeting. The subject appears notable

This is possible sockpuppeting, but I really don't have enough information to make a call on COI or not. I'd probably look at the editing habits of the previous puppets, and consult with a SPI clerk on the likely hood of puppeting.

Y, if the article wasn't moved into draft initially, you could move it back to draft, if there are major issues with it (lack of proper sourcing, NPOV, etc.). If it had already been draftified, then once it's moved back into mainspace you can't move it back. But I'd simply evaluate the article, tag or mark "reviewed" as warranted. But I might also open in SPI investigation. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:48, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

11 An article is moved from draftspace by an AfC reviewer with several thousand edits. Previously, the article had only been edited by accounts blocked as NOTHERE. The subject does not appear to meet GNG.

No COI based on this information. Reviewing and moving articles is part of the standard AFC work, and I'm seeing no indication of COI. Whether or not the original user had one is dependent on the type of NOTHERE block, but is irrelevant either way

Y, simply evaluate and tag/review as needed. Even if it was created by a sock or an UPE/COI editor, passing through AfC overcomes that. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:48, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

12 An article is moved from draftspace by an editor with a few hundred edits. Previously, the article had only been edited by an account that has been blocked for violating CIVIL. The subject is a borderline case for notability.

Basically the same as above.

Y - Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:48, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

---

Filtering - Deletion policy & other alternatives

In assignment 4, we look at articles which meetWP:Criteria for speedy deletion (CSD) whereby the the articles are deleted within a few hours to 24 hours from the time of the nomination. In Assignment 5, we discuss the what actions should be taken for those articles do not fit under the CSD criteria but do not meet relevant criteria for content of the encyclopedia.

Please read WP:PROD, WP:BLPPROD, WP:MERGE, WP:DRAFTIFY, WP:NPPDRAFT and WP:REDIR, WP:AFD and answer the following questions. (Provide links and hisdiff as needed.)

1. Under what circumstances do we propose deletion (PROD) a page and why do we do that?

Answer:

PROD is used for uncontroversial deletion, where you do not reasonably expect anybody to object to the deletion. It is used as a less complicated and easier method of proposing deletion, instead of having to take the page to the relevant XfD process

Y - Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:51, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

2. What should we do before we PROD a page? And what should be considered during a nomination?

Answer:

Before deletion the user should check it is eligible for deletion under a valid reason and ensuring meets the PROD criteria by checking the page hasn't been recently vandalized and no prior PROD's have been used, it has not been undeleted previously, has never been discussed at AfD/FfD, and is one of the listed types of pages (articles, lists, set indices, disambiguation pages, and files hosted on Wikipedia). During the nomination the user should follow the steps outlined at WP:PRODNOM to propose an article for deletion via PROD (or use Twinkle, which automates most steps)

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:51, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

3. What is the criteria when nominating a BLPPROD? If we choose not to BLPPROD a page what are the alternatives? (give three examples with explanations)

Answer:

BLPPROD can be used on BLP's which do not contain any sources in any form supporting any statements made in the article, and where there is no previous better referenced version to revert to. Alternatives to BLPPROD is CSD G10, for fully negative BLP's without any sources, A7 for non-notable BLP's, searching for sources yourself or taking it to AfD.

Y - remember that this includes external links (like a personal website), and the references do not have to be independent, or reliable. If there is a single ref, you can't BLPPROD. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:51, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

4. In what circumstances can we nominate an AFD and what step should be done prior such action.

Answer:

AfD is used in cases where you believe the article meets the deletion criteria but you either reasonably suspect objection or such objection has been shown (as an example by removing a PROD tag). Before a deletion the checks at WP:BEFORE should be checked, which includes checking if its eligible for CSD, ensuring no recent vandalism occured, checking the talk page for previous debates, checking if enough time has passed since the last discussion if a previous one exists, checking other languages for potential improvement material, and in cases where sourcing is an issue checking for sources.

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:51, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

5 How long do PROD, BLPPROD and AFD last before it is deleted or decline?

Answer:

7 days, although declining can happen at any point for PROD, BLPPROD can be removed once a RS has been added. In certain cases a AFD may be either closed either with a SNOW outcome or via other interventions, and it may be relisted if no consensus is clear.

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:51, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

6. Suppose a page has been previously BLPROD and a source was provided. If you still think that article should be deleted, what can you do?

Answer:

Take it to AfD, except if a CSD is still applicable, in which case it can be tagged under that.

Y - taking it to AfD is an option, but BLPProds do not count as actual PRODs, so you could prod it. However, I would not recommend that course of action if you've BLPProded something, and a single source is added which does not prove notability, and then going right to prod. I'll do it, but I review from the back of the queue, so sometimes I'll come across an article with 1 or 2 sources, which does not show notability, but it had been BLP'd weeks before and immediately the poor sourcing was added. That's about the only instance I'll follow that course of action. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:51, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

7. What are the reason to WP:Merge a page to another page?

Answer:

Articles can be merged if their on the same topic, either exactly or with a huge overlap. If the article is very short, unlikely to be expanded it can be merged into a broader topic article, and the same goes for articles which require background context.

Y - spot on. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:51, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

8. List 10 reasons we may WP:REDIR instead of deleting.

Answer:

1. Preservation of edit history, in order to ensure compliance with CC-BY-SA 3.0, which requires attribution
2. Redirecting non notable articles about specific subjects to a broader, notable article (specific examples of this are films (to director), albums (to group), individuals (to organization or company), city departments (e.g. fire, police to city), and non-notable primary schools (usually to the school district or city to which they belong)
3. Cases where the article name is a reasonable search term
4. If the article is old enough redirecting it preserves external links

Can't think of any others quickly -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 15:30, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Y - here are some others: an article about a non-notable album can be redirected to the artist (like your #2 above); discographies which simply duplicate what's on the artist's page; articles which have been WP:SPLIT from other articles, yet meet neither of the criteria (size or content) for that split; sub-organization of an organization, page has zero independent sources; duplicate article with different prose (a perfect example of this has happened to me a few times when I've created a film article and muffed the title in one way or another, and there was already an article on the film); duplicate article that is a cut-and-paste move (THIS IS A VERY COMMON ISSUE - I do several hundred of these a year); user replaced an existing redirect, new article is not notable; and finally, another big one, is enforcing an AFD that closed as "redirect", and a user tries to recreate the article. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:51, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

9. Please list the ways that you should search for sources in preparation for a PROD or AfD nomination, including steps which may only be relevant for certain subjects. How does this list change for subjects which are likely to have coverage in languages that you cannot read?

Answer:

Basics: Google, Google Books, Google News and Google news archive. For academic subjects Google Scholar is also useful. For articles which are likely to have sources in another language I would first check if Google turns them up, quickly check them with Translate and in cases of doubt consult a Editor which speaks the relevant language. If I didn't see anything I would also consult another editor, as they might know good sites to check.

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:51, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

10. When can an article be moved to draft space?

Answer:

Articles may be either moved if they show promise, do not meet the required standard and there is no evidence of active improvment, or when the author has a clear COI.

Y - not only COI, but also UPE. And remember that this means that an article "may" be draftified, not necessarily "should" be draftified. I rarely draftify articles which are new to mainspace, again, working at the back of the queue, they've usually been tagged for improvement for 1 or 2 months, without improvement. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:51, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

11. Nominate 5 articles for WP:AFD by using WP:Twinkle and provide explanations for your nominations. Take as much time as you need in order to complete this assignment successfully.

Answer 1:

Sky Hawk International Public School & College, Battagram, the only sources in the article at the time were a duplicate link to what seemed like a index of schools and a link to Google Maps, and I couldn't find any other sources online. Already got nominated previously, but that closed as soft delete, so G4 couldn't apply (I suspect otherwise it might have).

Y - a WP:BEFORE doesn't show anything promising. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:51, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Answer 2:

Sir Syed Institute of Learning & Motivation, Battagram, essentially the exact same reason. This one did get deleted via AFD with consencus, but wasn't similar enough for G4. There was a third article related to these, Al Syed Garden Public School & College, Battagram, but that one did meet the criteria for G4.

Y - a WP:BEFORE doesn't show anything promising. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:51, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Answer 3:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Er Beshi Bhalobasha Jay Na (2nd nomination). Renom of a previous deleted article which didn't meet G4, non notable film as far as I could find.

Y - although this one is borderline. The 1st source isn't really about the film, the second is a short blurb, and the next two are simply listings from a non-reliable source. The 5th source is actually a nice review, if it had a couple more like that, it would most likely survive AfD. It might still, if someone finds sources in the native tongue, but your instinct to bring it to discussion is valid. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:11, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Answer 4:

Caja (file manager), see PROD #1

Y - while the prod might have been premature (but see additional note I added there), this nom was definitely a good one. Will most likely be redirected as an ATD, but if you had done that first, it simply would have been reverted.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:58, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Answer 5:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Internet Relay Chat commands this too is a bizarre one, and probably technically abusing the AFD process for something its not supposed to be used for, which is proposing that something gets transwikied to meta, and then deleted over here, but I couldn't find a better venue. The list right now in my opinion fails LISTN and is a giant piece of CRUFT, but its also linked to in a lot of places as a cheat sheet, which is why I proposed transwiki and or moving to Wikipedia:.

Y - I think the question of transwiki-ing it is separate from whether or not this list is notable enough to remain on WP. Clearly this does not meet WP:LISTN. And kudos for taking on the not so easy ones. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:07, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

12. Participate in 5 WP:AFD that have no votes other than the nominator's statement. Please provide your reason either to delete, keep, redirect or merge.

Answer 1:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mustafa Duruer. I actually edit conflicted with someone here, but when I started my edit it was still unvoted. Subject is a non notable footballer, with one of the sources in the article not even mentioning him, and I was unable to find any which significantly mention him. In order to meet NFOOTBALL he'd need to have either played a Tier 1 International Match, or a fully professional league. I can find no evidence of the first, and the TFF Second League is not on the list of fully professional leagues

Y - spot on. You'll see plenty of these (and probably nominate your fair share). Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:10, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Answer 2:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve Vigneault. Non notable MMA fighter. He had one fight in a top tier tournament, which is 2 less than WP:NMMA #1 requires, doesn't meet the other 2 either as far as I can see, and the only news I could find was a mention in a list of top 10 guillotine chokes, and a mention on the UFC's website from said one top tier tournament. -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 08:05, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Y - again, spot on. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:08, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Answer 3:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rupert The Riley (song). Non notable and never released song by David Bowie. Intially suspected it might be a hoax, but the nominator was able to find an tumblr post proving its existence. -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 13:11, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:32, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Answer 4:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tsing Yi Fishermen's Children's Primary School. Non notable primary school. The article cites a single book which I couldn't find, and I can't find any source online at all mentioning it. As a primary nonprofit school it would need to either meet WP:GNG or WP:ORG, neither of which its even close to meeting

Y - Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:54, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Answer 5:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Dead Mac Scrolls. Non notable book about repairing a Mac. It gets mentioned a bunch in related software repair books, but as far as I saw they were all quick insignificant mentions, with none of the books I checked having anything in depth about it.

Y - Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:54, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

13. Nominate 2 articles for WP:PROD and state your reasons. Take as much time as you need in order to complete this assignment successfully.

Answer 1:

Caja (file manager), a file manager for Linux which I couldn't find any sources establishing notability for. Contested, and now at AFD.

Y - I think this was too soon to prod the stub. I probably would have tagged it with a more refs notice. It very well might be a candidate for deletion, but I don't have the time to do a proper BEFORE right now.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:36, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

I want to point out that the reasoning for the prod was sound, it was simply the timing. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:58, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Answer 2:

Nathan Bech. This is a bit of weird one, because its an ancient article. On the other hand its also a non notable article as far as I can see, and except one minor edit somewhere in 2020 the last edit to the actual content of the page was in 2014, which is reflected in the fact it uses future tense for things in November 2014 (there have been a lot of automated/semi automated/tool assisted edit, but none I saw actually meaningfully modified the content of the page)

Y - spot on. Fails NPOLITICIAN. Was probably created as part of his advertising campaign during his 2008 congressional run.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:58, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

14. Nominate 2 article for WP:BLPROD and state your reasons. Take as much time as you need in order to complete this assignment successfully.

Answer 1:

Craig Davidson (rugby union), no sources in any form, and the only things I got online seemed to be for someone else.

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:51, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Answer 2:

Dmitry Zhirnov

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:51, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

15.Nominate 2 article for WP:NPPDRAFT and state your reasons. Take as much time as you need in order to complete this assignment successfully.

Answer 1:

Draft:Vava TV serial, contained no actual prose, only a infobox and a cast list.

Y - although be careful about draftifying brand new articles, one of the aspects of WP:DRAFTIFY is "there is no evidence of active improvement". You draftified both of these within 3 hours of creation. Some editors might find that too quick on the gun (I for one, don't). But your judgement was well borne out when they submitted them for approval without improvement. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:51, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Answer 2:

Draft:Kavyaanjali( Malayalam) exactly the same as above.

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:51, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Tagging

In this assignment we look at tagging pages for problems. There any many tags available in Wikipedia and we will look at some of them here.

• Please enable Wikipedia:HotCat in your "Wikipedia references" - see How to enable/disable HotCat. The tool lists and proposes existing categories for auto-completion.
• Please install StubSorter user script. The script is for adding/removing stub tags.
• Please install Rater user script. The scripts provides a dialog interface to add, remove, or modify WikiProject banners, including class and importance assessment. Accessible from either the page itself or its talk page. after saving, you have to bypass your browser's cache to see the changes - see instruction at Wikipedia:Bypass your cache.
• Please enable User:Galobtter/Shortdesc helper gadget for editing, adding, and importing short descriptions.

Tagging in the article

Please read WP:TAGGING and answer the questions below. Please provide explanations in your own words and provide hist diff when applicable.

1. Why do we place tags on the article?

Answer:

By tagging an article we help editors specialized in a specific area of improvements find articles to improve, and alert readers there are potential problems with the article.

Y. It's also to alert the article's creator that there are issues with the article, and give them a chance to improve before the article might get nominated for deletion.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:40, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

2. What does "drive by tagging" mean?

Answer:

Adding tags for non obvious or percieved problems, without identifying the problem well enough that it can be easily fixed by other editors.

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:40, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

3. List 8 common tagging behaviors that should be avoided in an article?

Answer:

1. Adding too may tags
2. Adding redundant tags
3. Unclear/vague tags
4. Using a tag that isn't actually meant for your concern, simply because you can't find an better one
5. Adding tags which are technically correct, but don't help
6. Adding tags simply to prove a point
7. Adding a very wide tag, without an accompanying explanation

I can't actually think of an 8th right now -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 16:43, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Y - Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:00, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

4. When is it appropriate to remove the tags?

Answer:

If an editor without an conflict of interest doesn't see the problem, and also can't find an detailed message explaining what is wrong.

Y - also if you've corrected the issue, e.g. there's a "single source" tag, and you add one or more refs. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:00, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

5. Tag 10 articles from Special:Newpagesfeed where appropriate tags are needed and provide a personal message to the creator using page curator tool.

(pls provide links)

i. Answer:

1984 ABC Under-18 Championship, tagged as {{Unreferenced}}, message left here

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:40, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

ii. Answer:

B A F Shaheen College Kurmitola, tagged as {{Unreferenced}}, message left here

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:40, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

iii. Answer:

Kia KY, tagged as {{Unreferenced}}, message left here

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:40, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

iv. Answer:

Swati khartode, tagged as {{BLP sources}}, unsupported content removed and upon further checking tagged as A7, and a COI warning given to the editor (username is subject name but switched around).

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:40, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

v. Answer:

Die Macht der Gefühle, tagged as {{Unreferenced}}, message left here

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:00, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

vi. Answer:

John Katumba, tagged as {{Orphan}}, message left here

Y - Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:00, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

vii. Answer:

Mehlika Sultan, tagged as {{Unreferenced}}, message left here

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:00, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

viii. Answer:

Henize 70, tagged as {{Unreferenced}}, message left here

Y - Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:00, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

ix. Answer:

Ferdinand von Plettenberg, tagged as {{Unreferenced}}, message left here

Y - Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:00, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

x. Answer:

Hattiesburg-Laurel Combined Statistical Area, tagged as {{Unreferenced}}, message left here

Y - Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:00, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

6. Read Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types and use StubSorter user script. Tag 10 sub class article correctly from Special:Newpagesfeed. (pls provide links)

i. Answer:

Mamita Debbarma

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:30, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

ii. Answer:

Miss Elegance France

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:40, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

iii. Answer:

Banoth Madanlal

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:40, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

iv. Answer:

Aidan Burke

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:40, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

v. Answer:

Bamrauliya

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:40, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

vi. Answer:

Tharcisse Niyongabo

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:40, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

vii. Answer:

B A F Shaheen College Kurmitola

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:40, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

viii. Answer:

Kia KY

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:40, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

ix. Answer:

Swati khartode

It's already been deleted, so can't check it.

x. Answer:

Praja Shakti Democratic Party

Y - while organization is not incorrect, India-poli-stub would have been a better choice

Categorization

7. Please read Wikipedia:Categorization and assign 10 articles from Special:Newpagesfeed to one or more useful categories. You can check similar articles for potentially relevant categories. (pls provide links)

i. Answer:

IFFHS World's Best Top Goal Scorer

Y - nice job. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:26, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

ii. Answer:

Šegotići

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:24, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

iii. Answer:

Kenya Army Armoured Brigade

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:16, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

iv. Answer:

Ron Cameron (sports broadcaster)

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:16, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

v. Answer:

Colégio de Nossa Senhora da Assunção

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:16, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

vi. Answer:

Khivabad

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:16, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

vii. Answer:

Baobab oil

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:57, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

viii. Answer:

Bhonsles of Nagpur

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:57, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

ix. Answer: Embabo

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:57, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

x. Answer:

Ashley Lukashevsky

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:57, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Sorting

8. Please read Wikipedia:WikiProject and Wikipedia:Content assessment and tag 10 articles from Special:Newpagesfeed with appropriate WikiProject and class types on the articles' talk pages. Please use Rater user script. (pls provide links)

i. Answer:

IFFHS World's Best Top Goal Scorer

Y - spot on. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:27, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

ii. Answer:

Šegotići

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:24, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

iii. Answer:

Kenya Army Armoured Brigade

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:16, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

iv. Answer:

Ron Cameron (sports broadcaster)

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:16, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

v. Answer:

Colégio de Nossa Senhora da Assunção

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:16, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

vi. Answer:

Khivabad

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:16, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

vii. Answer:

Baobab oil

Y Was there reason you felt this deserved start class rather than C? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:00, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

viii. Answer:

Bhonsles of Nagpur

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:00, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

ix. Answer: Embabo

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:00, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

x. Answer:

Ashley Lukashevsky

Y - some editors might have given this a stub class, but that's a matter of interpretation. I also would have marked it start. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:00, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

---

WikiProject Short description

9. Short descriptions help a reader to identify which search result is most likely to suit their needs. Most mainspace pages should have a description, preferably no longer than 40 characters. Please read Wikipedia:Short description and Wikipedia:WikiProject Short descriptions and provide 10 short descriptions in 10 different articles from Special:Newpagesfeed. Please enable User:Galobtter/Shortdesc helper prior making the edits. (pls provide links)

i. Answer:

IFFHS World's Best Top Goal Scorer

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:27, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

ii. Answer:

Šegotići

Y - while not part of this exercise, notice what I did on the article. I checked the ref to make sure it was appropriate, and the article creator did something very common, and was lazy in providing the ref. So I corrected it, and then added the reflist template. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:26, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

iii. Answer:

Kenya Army Armoured Brigade

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:17, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

iv. Answer:

Ron Cameron (sports broadcaster)

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:17, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

v. Answer:

Colégio de Nossa Senhora da Assunção

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:17, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

vi. Answer:

Khivabad

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:17, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

vii. Answer:

Baobab oil

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:00, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

viii. Answer:

Bhonsles of Nagpur

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:00, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

ix. Answer: Embabo

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:00, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

x. Answer:

Ashley Lukashevsky

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:00, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Communication with editors

We are in the homestretch now! Wikipedia is the product of collaborations between many editors, some experienced and some new. Wikipedia values all constructive editors' contributions alike. Communication in a civil, respectful manner is a vital part in Wikipedia, and it should be welcomed rather than discouraged especially for new editors who are not familiar with Wikipedia guidelines and policies. Most new editors find it is a steep learning curve during the first few months of editing articles or creating articles in Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia:Assume good faith, WP:BITE, WP:CIVIL, Wikipedia:Etiquette, and welcome template and answer the following questions. Do provide links and hist diff where appropriate.

Communication and editor interactions

1. In your own words, why is it important to WP:AGF and not WP:BITE new editors?

Newcomers represent an incredibley important resource, because they are the future of Wikipedia. By assuming good faith with newcomers and slowly and respectfully teaching them about our policies instead of biting them we ensure they'll stay and keep contributing, thereby adding more editors to the site. -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 15:24, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Y - Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:43, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

2. How do we deal with a bad faith registered user and how do we deal with a bad faith IP editor?

It depends in both cases on what kind of bad faith we're talking about. Directly vandalising users can be reported to WP:AIV, while more complicated cases are served better by first attempting dispute resolution, and if no other way is possible taking them to WP:ANI. -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 15:24, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Y - remember in cases of potential vandalism, there are the vandalism templates, which can be found (along with many others) at Wikipedia:Template index/User talk namespace. But templates should only be used with new users. If the user has been on WP awhile, you must be aware of WP:DTTR, in which case a personal message on the user's talkpage is the way to go. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:43, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

3. What can we do to welcome and help the newcomers.? (List 10 different ways/scenarios)

i. Answer:

Assume that newcomers are here to improve the encyclopedia, even if their first edits contain mistakes.

ii. Answer:

Link them to policies when mentioning it, and use either the full pagename (a new editor won't know what NPOV stands for).

iii. Answer:

Drop a newcomer a message if you see them doing something particularity helpful.

iv. Answer:

Use their user talk page instead of UAA for borderline violations; they likely won't be familiar with our policies.

v. Answer:

Try improving a new substandard article, rather than immediately tagging it for deletion.

vi. Answer:

When reverting test edits explain what a test edit is and point them to the sandbox, rather than warning them for vandalism.

vii. Answer:

Help them with little things, like the way signatures work.

viii. Answer:

If a user jumps into a overly complex topic quickly gently help them, rather than calling them stupid.

ix. Answer:

When a user reopens an already closed discussion point them to the discussion, rather than shutting it down.

x. Answer: When linking to policies use a piped link with a informative display text.

Y - all good answers. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:49, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

4. In you own words, provide 10 ways to avoid biting the newcomers.

i. Answer:

Improve their work by editing it to comply more with our guidelines instead of blanket removing it.

Y - Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:51, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

ii. Answer:

Use English in edit summaries and link any abbreviations.

Y - Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:51, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

iii. Answer:

On user talk pages pipe any link to a policy page with a description of what it is instead of a two letter abbreviation.

Y - Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:51, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

iv. Answer:

Always remain calm and avoid attacking the editor or the edit; instead explain why it is wrong.

Y - Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:51, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

v. Answer:

Don't act sarcastic to new users.

Y - Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:51, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

vi. Answer:

Always assume good faith with new users, unless the bad faith is without question.

Y - Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:51, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

vii. Answer:

Avoid nominating new pages for deletion as the author may still be working on them. In cases were it can't remain in mainspace draftify it.

Y - this is especially true when you review "from the front of the queue", rather than from the back. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:51, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

viii. Answer:

Don't use excessive maintenance tags, and when you use a tag leave a message explaining it

Y - Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:51, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

ix. Answer:

When taking the step of deleting something leave a personalised message

Y - Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:51, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

x. Answer:

Acknowledge that different people think differently and try and reach a common ground.

Y - Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:51, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Those are all good, there are others of course, but a simple one which is very frequently overlooked is to leave a welcome template on their talk page. I also try to encourage dialogue by letting them know it's perfectly fine to ask me any question they have about WP. Finally, there's also pointing them to the WP:TEAHOUSE. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:51, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

5. Place 5 different welcome templates on 5 different newcomers. (Please provide user talk page links)

i. Answer: User talk:Tombritchi

YOnel5969 ^{TT me} 15:49, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

ii. Answer: User talk:Gene Hartley

Y Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:49, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

iii. Answer:

iv. Answer:

v. Answer:

6. List 5 uncivil behaviors and explain how you would deal with them.

i. Answer:

Outing - disclosing personal information of another editor or a subject. Revert the edit and send it to OS.

ii. Answer:

Trolling - don't feed them. Don't engage, just report to AIV and wait for an admin to sort it out.

iii. Answer:

Personal attacks - for light infractions warn them, but even a single bad incident can be a reason for sending them to ANI.

iv. Answer:

Legal threats - point the editor to our policy and report the edit for revision deletion. If they persist report them to ANI

v. Answer:

Accusing another editor of being a SPA or SOCK. This is a big accusation, and always needs to be backed up with evidence.

Y - spot on.

A token of appreciation

We reward Wikipedia editors for their hard work and due diligence by awarding them barnstars as a token of appreciation, encouragement and make its recipient feel good of their contributions. The choice of banstar given should be fair and appropriate, which will help prevent over-use. There are many different type of banstars, kindly read Wikipedia:Barnstars, Wikipedia:Personal user awards

7. Give 5 different banstars to 5 different editor and do provide relevant text as to why you are awarding them. (Please provide links)

i. Answer:

User talk:Firefly#A barnstar for you!

Y - I especially enjoyed the stream of comments it set off. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:52, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

ii. Answer:

iii. Answer:

iv. Answer:

v. Answer:

---

Final Exam

Sounds so official doesn't it? Wooooo... Based on your efficiency in going through each part, I think this is simply a formality, but it never hurts to review. There are 10 parts, so take it at your own pace. I'll check at least once, perhaps twice a day, so we'll be through in a week or two. Part 1 is one of the longest parts, so don't worry, they are not all this extensive.

Part 1 - Questions

1. In your own words, how should you communicate with editors whose articles you are reviewing?

2. What kind of sources are needed to demonstrate the notability of the subject? Why is this important?

3. What constitutes a WP:COPYVIO? When might something not be copyvio despite having text identical to a source?

4. What should we do when we encounter WP:COPYVIO in an article?

5. What should we do when we encounter WP:PAID?

6. When do we nominate a page for WP:G12 and when do we WP:REVDEL the COPYVIO text?

7. What makes an article a WP:PROMO page? What should we do when we encounter such an article?

8. Why do we tag a page? What are common tags to place in an article?

9. When do we WP:R2 a page?

10. When do we WP:PROD a page?

11. When do we WP:BLPPROD a page?

12. When do we WP:AfD a page?

13. Why it is important to WP:CSD a page when the article fit the CSD criteria?

14. When do we decide to WP:R2 / WP:PROD / WP:BLPPROD a page when the article has no source in it?

15. In your own words, list 5 things you have learnt from observing and participating in AfD.