Jump to content

User:Rosguill/GargAvinash NPPSCHOOL

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello, welcome to your New Page Patrol School page! Please make sure you have this page added to your watchlist. 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).

How to use this page

This page will be built up over your time in the School, with new sections being added as you complete old ones. Each section will end with a task, written in bold type - this might 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.

Notability

[edit]
Extended content

PART 1 I know that you said that you've already read through the notability guidelines, but given that this is a critical part of NPP, I'd like to ask you the following questions to confirm that you have a proper understanding of the subject. If you pass these without any issue, we can move on to other topics. signed, Rosguill talk 18:56, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Questions

[edit]
Question 1

In your own words, how is notability defined on Wikipedia?

We can call any subject notable for Wikipedia if that subject has more than one sources available on the internet. These sources should not be directly connected to the subject and also the sources should be little popular (like leading news agencies and published books). GargAvinash (talk) 20:09, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
Red XN, the bar for notability is not more than one sources available on the internet, it's significant coverage in multiple reliable sources. The sources don't need to be on the internet, and there's no strict number of sources; if the sources are extremely thorough two may be enough (even one may be enough for the article to not be tagged if it's an extremely high quality source that clearly is building on information in other reliable sources). If the coverage is not particularly significant or thorough, even four or five sources may not cut it. If we had to pick a number of sources with significant coverage, a common standard is that the number is WP:THREE to establish sufficient notability such that even improvement tags are not necessary, although NPP reviewers are expected to be flexible and assess each article on a case by case basis (THREE's advice is targeted at editors creating articles so that they pass review without issue; it is not a guideline or policy for when you're reviewing).
Finally, the source's popularity is not terribly important. In some cases, you may want to establish that sources are not exclusively local news, as local press often leans toward the WP:ROUTINE and may not do a full proper investigation of subjects that they report on. However, there are plenty of popular publications that are not reliable (e.g The Daily Mail, most tabloids), and the gold standard of reliability, peer-reviewed research papers, are generally not particularly "popular". signed, Rosguill talk 23:41, 2 March 2020 (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?

I don't think that this type of instructions should have an article on Wikipedia because Wikipedia is not a place for DYI instructions. It is an encyclopedia and it must only have encyclopedic materials. GargAvinash (talk) 20:15, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
checkY, the specific policy covering this is WP:NOTMANUAL. signed, Rosguill talk 23:41, 2 March 2020 (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?

WP:GNG has generalised notability guidelines for any article on Wikipedia. For a specific type of subject, we have some detailed guidelines. I don't find any contradictions between these. I have seen many of the subject-specific notability guidelines stating that it must also pass GNG. While patrolling any article, we should keep both GNG and notability guidelines of that subject in mind. GargAvinash (talk) 20:27, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
checkY, this is essentially correct. There are some times when you'll come across an article where an SNG is met and it's not clear whether GNG has been met. Depending on the article and the SNG in question, it may or may not be advisable to nominate such an article for deletion. signed, Rosguill talk 23:41, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Subject-specific notability guidelines

[edit]

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

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?

SNGs are notability criteria for a specific topic. If any article meets the criteria on SNG then it have followed the notablity guidelines. Also, we can't only rely on GNG for determining the notability of an article for Wikipedia. We should mind the subject-specific guidelines too. GargAvinash (talk) 15:11, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
Red XN, all articles are expected to meet the GNG. SNGs are shortcuts to GNG, ostensibly vetted by the community such that if the SNG is met then GNG will have been met even if the necessary sources are not available to us right now. In practice, what this means is that if you come across an article that meets an SNG but does not clearly meet GNG, you need to make a judgment call. If we're pretty close to GNG, then we should accept on the strength of the SNG. However, if the subject seems particularly obscure and the sources are nowhere near meeting GNG (after having conducted a WP:BEFORE), we need to consider deletion. Note as well that several SNGs, particularly (but not exclusively) NBIO-related ones are rather subjective. Has a given actor had multiple significant roles in notable films/shows/etc.? If a subject only weakly meets a subjective SNG, there may be grounds for deleting the article. signed, Rosguill talk 19:06, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Break

[edit]

GargAvinash, looks like you had a bit of trouble with the subject-specific notability guidelines. I've added more questions below, but I also want to open up space here in case you have further questions or disagree with my comments above. signed, Rosguill talk 19:06, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Scenarios

[edit]

For the following scenarios, review just based on "subject notability guidelines" (SNG) "alone" for sake of the exercise. Do not consider any sources or other policies. Please answer if the subject meets the SNG guidelines based on the given content below, and specify which notability criteria they meet or fail.

Scenario 1

An editor creates an article about "2024 Summer Olympics" in 2020 without providing any sources, is the subject considered not notable and why?

"2024 Summer Olympics" can be notable if it has been announced officially at the time of creating this article; according to criteria 1 and 2 at Wikipedia:Notability (events). If the article's creator has not provided any sources then it doesn't mean that this event is not notable, wee can add references.GargAvinash (talk) 11:57, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
checkY, as a follow up question, can you think of what we should do if an editor creates an article about 2040 Olympics and no sources are available? signed, Rosguill talk 17:25, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
I think that this event is not yet notable because sources are necessary for any content on Wikipedia. GargAvinash (talk) 08:14, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
Correct. What do you think we should do with the article in that case (don't worry if you're not sure, the answer isn't in the materials that I've asked you to read so far). signed, Rosguill talk 17:26, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
I guess, we should move that article in draft namespace. GargAvinash (talk) 18:54, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
For articles about recurring events like the Olympics and most other sports championships, standard practice is actually to convert not-notable-yet editions of the event to the general article about the event, in this case Summer Olympics. signed, Rosguill talk 19:23, 6 March 2020 (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.

If the company has received significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject as stated on Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) page. This page also mentions the meaning of Significant coverage. So, we can decide on the notability of the company accordingly. I think (nowhere mentioned) that we have nothing to do with the amount of investments received by a company. GargAvinash (talk) 11:57, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
Based on the information currently provided, would you be able to conclude that the company is notable? signed, Rosguill talk 17:25, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
There is not much additional criteria for commercial companies on Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). If the given information is verifiable by sources and the company has significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject then this can be notable. For the sake of significant coverage we can go through WP:CORPDEPTH. GargAvinash (talk) 08:19, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
checkY I was looking for a clear no but you obviously understand the criteria at play here, which is good enough. signed, Rosguill talk 17:26, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
Scenario 3

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

This subject may be notable according to WP:SPORTSPERSON but I can't say surely because I have near to no knowledge about fighting competitions so that I can decide whether he has participated in major competitions or not. GargAvinash (talk) 11:57, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
Look a little harder at WP:NSPORTS, a relevant guideline can be found there. signed, Rosguill talk 17:25, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
WP:NMMA says martial artists are presumed notable if they have fought at least three professional fights for a top-tier MMA organization. According to sources available about him on the internet, he has fought only two top-tier (WP:MMATIER) fights (UFC Fight Night 162 & UFC Fight Night 149). So, he is currently not notable for Wikipedia. GargAvinash (talk) 08:14, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
checkY
Scenario 4

An upcoming action drama title "Suleiman the Great" based on the the life of Suleiman the Magnificent, was reported will be in production in December 2019 and to be released on August 2020 in the cinemas.

Not notable. Unreleased films can have article on Wikipedia only when we have reliable sources indicating that the principal photography of the film has been started. GargAvinash (talk) 20:43, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
checkY
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.

Can be notable as WP:POLITICIAN says, Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage are presumed to be notable. GargAvinash (talk) 20:43, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
Red XN, as the subject hasn't held a position yet, they're not a major local political figure. Major local political figure is generally understood as referring to local government officials of very large/important locations, e.g. the mayor of a major city like New York or Mumbai. It is, however, possible for subjects that don't meet WP:NPOLITICIAN to meet WP:GNG, but that's not the question being asked here. signed, Rosguill talk 21:29, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
Scenario 6

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

Not notable according to criteria mentioned at WP:ENT. GargAvinash (talk) 20:43, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
checkY

The following scenarios are all articles on Wikipedia which meet notability guidelines. Please simply assess whether an SNG would apply to the article's subject, ignoring GNG for the sake of this exercise.

Scenario 7

Carlos Alós-Ferrer

Following Criterion 8 at WP:NACADEMIC of Wikipedia:Notability (academics). GargAvinash (talk) 02:45, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
checkY
Scenario 8

Alistair Overeem

Following first point of WP:NMMA and Criterion 1 at WP:NKICK of Wikipedia:Notability (sports). GargAvinash (talk) 02:45, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
checkY
Scenario 9

Jennifer Lopez

Following Criterion 1 at WP:NACTOR and Criterion 3 at WP:ARTIST of Wikipedia:Notability (people). GargAvinash (talk) 02:45, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
checkY
Scenario 10

Three Mile Island accident

Following WP:LASTING at WP:EVENTCRIT of Wikipedia:Notability (events). GargAvinash (talk) 02:45, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
checkY
Scenario 11

Persepolis

Following WP:GEOFEAT of Wikipedia:Notability (geographic features). GargAvinash (talk) 02:45, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
checkY

Sources

[edit]

Background for trainees

[edit]
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. As such, claims made in articles should be supported by independent (secondary), reliable sources for verification. Please read WP:RS, WP:IS, WP:RSP, WP:V, WP:PROVEIT, WP:Primary, WP:Secondary, and WP:Tertiary.
You can contact WP:RX if you could not find the sources yourself either on the web due to paywalls or offline-only sources.

Exercises

[edit]
1.
Topic Definition 5 Examples Comment by Trainer
Reliable source Sources for any article on Wikipedia must be reliable. Generally the sources which are not too new or old and is not directly connected to the topic are considered reliable. GargAvinash (talk) 13:30, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
  1. (example)The Guardian newspaper
  2. BBC News
  3. Asian News International
  4. Astronomical Journal
  5. The Conversation
  6. Deadline Hollywood
 Orange tickY, the examples are solid, but in addition to the description given, I would add that reliable sources are generally either professionally published works with editorial teams and a track record for accuracy (as well as a track record of retracting/correcting anything that turns out to have been false), or are published by established experts in a field relevant to the subject matter being covered (e.g. a blog by a professor in physics with a track record of publishing well-cited papers is reliable for physics-related claims, despite being a blog, by virtue of its author's credentials) signed, Rosguill talk 02:53, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
User generated sources Sources that are generated without the verification of facts. GargAvinash (talk) 13:30, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
  1. Personal website
  2. Social media
  3. Internet forums
  4. Personal blogs
  5. Self-published videos
 checkY, I'm not sure I'd use the phrasing you did for the description, but you clearly get the picture. signed, Rosguill talk 02:53, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
Non Independent source Non-independent sources mean the sources that have vested interest in the topic implies they may have a financial or legal relationship to the topic. GargAvinash (talk) 20:31, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
  1. Autobiographies
  2. Corporate websites
  3. Conflicts of interest
  4. Album sleeve notes
  5. Press Releases
 checkY, although I'd say that virtually any relationship with the topic makes something non-independent, no need to limit it to financial or legal relationships. signed, Rosguill talk 22:14, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
2.
Type Definition Examples (15 Primary ; 5 Secondary ; 5 Tertiary) Comment by Trainer
Primary Primary Sources are very close to any event. If it is a published written source then it is often written by the people who are directly involved in that topic. It is the actual stuff that can be found for any subject. GargAvinash (talk) 20:55, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
  1. (example) scientific journal articles reporting experimental research results
  2. Personal interview of a person
  3. Information about movies on movie's or the production website
  4. Autobiography of a person
  5. Press Conference video
  6. A scientific paper authored by the person who did an experiment
  7. Eyewitnesses of an incident
  8. Directly reported news by news reporters
  9. Census data by the organization that organised the census.
  10. Facebook post or tweet by the official handle of a corporate
  11. Ancient diaries
  12. Survey data by the organization that organised the survey
  13. A published book itself
  14. Information about school and colleges on their official website
  15. Constitution of a country
  16. Press release documents
  1. N/A
  2. Orange tickY Interviews can include a mix of primary and secondary coverage. Anything that the interview subject says is primary, but good interviews generally include a few paragraphs of introduction at the beginning which is typically secondary. Depending on how serious the journalist is, the content of their questions may be secondary coverage. Long form journalistic pieces based around interviews like this one can be considered secondary for everything other than quotes and statements attributed to the subject signed, Rosguill talk 22:14, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
  3. checkY
  4. checkY
  5. This is identical to #1
  6. checkY
  7. Orange tickY, technically this can be true, but in practice almost all print coverage by a news organization will include secondary analysis
  8. checkY
  9. checkY
  10. checkY although really this goes for any diary regardless of age
  11. checkY
  12. checkY, assuming you mean a published book when used for information about the book. Books covering independent subjects will be either secondary or tertiary
  13. checkY
  14. checkY
  15. checkY signed, Rosguill talk 22:14, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
Secondary Secondary Sources relies on primary sources. It provides the author's own views on any incident or topic based on primary sources. This includes the analysis of facts obtained by primary sources. GargAvinash (talk) 20:55, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
  1. (example) newspaper
  2. Movie reviews
  3. Review article that analyzes research papers
  4. Biography of a person authored from the autobiography
  5. Review of a Book
  6. Scientific journals
  1. N/A
  2. checkY
  3. checkY
  4. Orange tickY if the author and publisher are independent of the subject, any biography is a secondary source, regardless of its source materials
  5. checkY
  6. Red XN, as mentioned in the primary source section, scientific journals also publish original research, which will generally be primary in nature

As far as your overall definition is concerned, while secondary sources generally do rely on primary sources, secondary sources are also allowed to incorporate information from other secondary sources or tertiary sources as well. signed, Rosguill talk 22:14, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Tertiary Tertiary Sources are either based on primary and secondary sources altogether or only on secondary sources. It summarizes the information obtained from primary and secondary sources. GargAvinash (talk) 20:55, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
  1. (example) encyclopedias
  2. Bibliographies
  3. Overview articles of any topic
  4. Compendia
  5. School textbooks
  6. Almanac
 checkY
3.


Subject Primary Secondary Tertiary Comment by Trainer
Example: Art Example:Sculpture Example:Article critiquing the sculpture Example:Encyclopedic article on the sculptor
History Original script Study by archaeologists Analysis of script & study by journalists Orange tickY, the example for the tertiary source sounds like a secondary source. Tertiary sources generally don't introduce original analysis, but rather just summarize other sources
Science "Experiment" in journal Analysis of the experiment by a profesor Chapter of the experiment in school textbook checkY
Athletes Straight answers by them Media coverage on them Encyclopedic article on them checkY
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.
4
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.[1][2] Fallingwater, which has been called "the best all-time work of American architecture."[3] 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.[4]


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/ Yes The source is major newspaper Yes The source is reputable published source Yes The source discusses the subject directly and in detail ✔ Yes
https://franklloydwright.org/work/ No Foundation is closely related with the subject Yes Seems they do fact checking for the reputation of foundation Yes All works and biography of subject is listed there ✘ No
https://web.archive.org/web/20080302053743/http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/jul2004/nf20040728_3153_db078.htm Yes Magzine is not related with or biased towards the subject Yes Though it was questioned for "The Big Hack" issue but now it looks good for reliability Yes Article on the subject seems significant ✔ Yes
https://books.google.com/books?id=KSA1HTTU-eMC Yes Author and publisher is unrelated with subject No Author is not notable for writing other books Yes Book is wholly based on the subject ✘ 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}}.

Orange tickY, all correct except the book: John Wiley and Sons is a well-known and reputable publisher, so we can assume that it's sufficiently reliable in this context. If the author had an established track record of being unreliable, that would be a different story. A citation like that will hold up through GA-level, maybe at FA it would cause trouble, but for NPP this caliber of source is fine, provided that it's not being used to support some outlandish claim (e.g. "Wright was briefly the King of France from 1940–1942"). signed, Rosguill talk 17:18, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Hoffman, Barbara (2017-06-07). "Famed architect Frank Lloyd Wright had a dark side". New York Post. Retrieved 2019-10-04.
  2. ^ "Frank Lloyd Wright's Work". Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation. Retrieved 2019-10-04.
  3. ^ "BW Online | July 28, 2004 | Frank Lloyd Wright: America's Architect". 2008-03-02. Archived from the original on 2008-03-02. Retrieved 2019-10-04.
  4. ^ Robert C. Twombly (24 April 1987). Frank Lloyd Wright: His Life and His Architecture. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 978-0-471-85797-6.


5

Jordan Lennon (born February 22, 2000), is a British film producer and actor. [1] Lennon is currently a member of BAFTA.[2] He continues to work aside 20th Century Fox, Warner Bros, Wicked Wales, Capture Studios, Cineworld, Paramount Pictures, and Rockefeller Foundation.[3]

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.[4] In December 2018, Jordan and Rowan finished British Film Academy.[5] 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/ Yes Source has not any connection with the subject No I have seen some wrong details on IMDb means they don't verify the informations on regular basis No Has limited details about the subject ✘ No
http://www.bafta.org/wales No It is stated that subject is a member of this academy No We don't know how they add details about their members No I don't see any details about subject on the website ✘ No
https://www.linkedin.com/in/jordan-d-98111a125 No assuming (it is a dead link) if it goes to the subject's profile, it can't be independent because users feed the details themselves No We can rely on it for the primary information only if the profile is verified No Only limited information is generally provided on a linkedIn profile ✘ No
https://www.behindthevoiceactors.com/Jordan-David/ Yes Not related to subject in any way No Not reputable for fact-checking No Very less information about the subject ✘ 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

  1. ^ "Jordan D. Lennon". IMDb. Retrieved 2019-01-21.
  2. ^ "BAFTA Cymru". www.bafta.org. 2014-06-16. Retrieved 2019-01-21.
  3. ^ Lennon, Jordan. "LinkedIn Account". LinkedIn. {{cite web}}: |archive-date= requires |archive-url= (help)
  4. ^ "Jordan David - 2 Character Images". Behind The Voice Actors. Retrieved 2019-10-04.
  5. ^ "BFI Film Academy". Tape Community Music & Film. 2016-08-24. Retrieved 2019-01-21.

checkY, all correct. Beyond your hunch about unreliable information, IMDb actually has an entry at WP:RSP which records a clear consensus that IMDb is not a reliable source due to its reliance on crowdsourcing and a lack of fact checking. signed, Rosguill talk 17:33, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Section break for convenience

[edit]
6
Sonny Bill Williams 2010

Sonny William Williams (born 3 August 1985), who is a Muslim[1], is a New Zealand All blacks rugby union footballer,[2] Williams was a Marist Saints junior when he was spotted playing in Auckland by Bulldogs talent scout John Ackland.[3] 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.[4]

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 Yes It is an news/media website which is not related to our subject. Yes Seems not biased and leading news agency. Yes Many important information missing but the coverage is not shrinked. They have covered much about personal life of the subject. ✔ Yes
http://stats.allblacks.com/asp/Profile.asp?ABID=1108 ? Unknown
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/warriors-league-team/news/article.cfm?c_id=360&objectid=10399308 ? Unknown
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/10/01/1096527943523.html ? Unknown
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

  1. ^ "2019 Rugby World Cup: Sonny Bill Williams is expecting a fourth child". Mail Online. 2019-09-25. Retrieved 2019-10-04.
  2. ^ "Stats | allblacks.com". stats.allblacks.com. Retrieved 2019-10-04.
  3. ^ Rattue, Chris (2 September 2006). "Jerome Ropati – Miracle in the making". New Zealand Herald. APN Holdings. Retrieved 10 October 2010.
  4. ^ "The King, Sonny and heir". Sydney Morning Herald. Fairfax. 2 October 2004. Retrieved 12 November 2011.


7
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,[1] until his resignation on November 9, 2012[2] after his affair with Paula Broadwell was reported.[3]

Petraeus was born in Cornwall-on-Hudson, New York, the son of Sixtus Petraeus (1915–2008),[4] a sea captain from Franeker, Netherlands.[5]


In 2003, Petraeus commanded the 101st Airborne Division in the fall of Baghdad[6][7]


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/ Yes The source is major newspaper Yes The source is reputable published source Yes 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 ? Unknown
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/david-petraeus-paula-broadwell_n_2118893 ? Unknown
https://www.geni.com/people/Sixtus-Petraeus/6000000015418360012 ? Unknown
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2010/05/petraeus-exclusive-201005 ? Unknown
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/beyond/interviews/petraeus.html ? Unknown
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/david-petraeus-general-surge-401740.html ? Unknown
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

  1. ^ "Petraeus sworn in as CIA director". CNN. Retrieved October 11, 2019.
  2. ^ Johnson, Kevin (November 9, 2012). "David Petraeus resigns from CIA". USA Today. Retrieved November 9, 2012.
  3. ^ "Petraeus Shocked By Girlfriend's Emails". HuffPost. 2012-11-12. Retrieved 2019-10-11.
  4. ^ "Sixtus Petraeus". geni.com.
  5. ^ "David Petraeus' Winning Streak". Vanity Fair. March 30, 2010. Retrieved October 11, 2019.
  6. ^ "beyond baghdad". www.pbs.org. 2004-02-12. Retrieved 2019-10-11.
  7. ^ "David Petraeus: General Surge". The Independent. 2007-09-08. Retrieved 2019-10-11.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Rosguill/GargAvinash_NPPSCHOOL&oldid=1092352645"