User talk:BuySomeApples/2023/December

Transhumanism Technologies.

Greetings - I reviewed a lot of guidance on what types of articles fit neatly into 'encyclopedic content'.

Atomicity is likely at the center of most articles - but even a cursory review reveals many articles that are arguably a little more free ranging.

I am certainly not sure if an article with a title of 'Transhumanism Technologies' is actually within the scope of WP - I think you saw my original submission as an 'essay' - I did not get much feedback beyond that - and that's fine.

I'm not sure if you act in an advisory role - I suspect such an article would never really fit - but I did refine the lede/lead (?) - and any feedback on its admissibility - would be appreciated.

The technologies at the heart of a lot of transhumanism are actually fairly mainstream - rather obvious I was looking for one central theme to tie the disciplines together.

Cheers Dr. BeingObjective (talk) 21:29, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi @BeingObjective:, I think one of the main things to remember about Wikipedia is that it doesn't allow WP:ORIGINAL RESEARCH or WP:SYNTHESIS of existing sources. If you could find tertiary or secondary sources dealing with Transhumanism Technologies as a discrete topic, you could probably make an article about that. However, you might be right that it doesn't exactly fit Wikipedia, in that case you might look into publishing elsewhere. It might also be cool to work on some existing pages related to transhumanism! BuySomeApples (talk) 13:41, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Draft: Bassetlaw Bulldogs Rugby League Football Club

Hi. Thank you very much for taking a look at my article. I appreciate the time that you have given it. Would you be able to give me some advice please, as some of your feedback goes a little against what the previous reviewer worked with me on, before I resubmitted it. (He preferred not to just put it through, but to ask for someone else to have a look after the edits)

We established that from a notoriety point of view, the article met the guidelines. We worked therefore on ensuring all claims were backed up with reliable, independent, secondary sources, which gave more than a passing acknowledgement to the subject. Since then, I have added two further references which directly report from reliable secondary sources, the claims made.

In effect, the sources come from the following: The National Governing Body website for the sport of Rugby League; An in-depth article from the website of a UK registered charity; Audited, signed minutes of a Local Parish Council Meeting, published on the council website; several news stories published online by National World Publishing Ltd, owners of a series of regional newspapers.

I would really appreciate your help in understanding why these sources are not deemed reliable or secondary, along with a suggestion of what I will need to do to ensure the current content is satisfactory for publications.

Many thanks indeed.

PS - As last time, I received a simultaneous email asking me if I wanted to pay for support to get this article through. I trust this was not from you.

Hovispride (talk) 15:36, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Hovispride: The sources in the draft at the time that I reviewed didn't seem to meet WP:GNG or WP:ATHLETE. Many of the sources used do not meet the criteria set out in these guidelines. For example, routine local news coverage or minutes from a parish council meeting aren't going to demonstrate notability. @Vanderwaalforces: seems to have declined the draft because of insufficient sources or lack of reliable sources, which is also a good reason to decline. There can be more than one issue with a page and different reviewers will see different issues.

P.S. If you're receiving emails asking for payment, that's a scam. Go to WP:SCAM for information on how to report the email(s). BuySomeApples (talk) 04:58, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for your response. I’m struggling to understand why a sports club would need to meet wiki standards on athletes? I’m also unsure how a number of world firsts in a sport would not be considered notable, especially when they are given coverage on an internationally recognised sporting governing body.

I worked with the previous reviewer to put the very references you quoted in place before resubmission, which is disappointing.

Please can you clarify?

Thank you. Hovispride (talk) 07:03, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Hovispride: WP:ATHLETE is used to help determine whether sportspeople or organizations (like clubs and teams) meet notability guidelines. Between this and WP:GNG, you can usually determine notability fairly accurately. I really recommend that you read both of those pages since most of the advice I could give you comes from there.

When it comes to references, there are many sources that are reliable enough to verify information on Wikipedia, but don't count towards notability. For example, interviews are great sources of information, but in many cases they don't count towards notability. It looks like you fixed a lot of issues with sourcing, but it doesn't look like notability was met yet imo. BuySomeApples (talk) 08:13, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for the reply. Much appreciated clarification. I looked at the WP:ATHLETE again to confirm what I had thought; 'This guideline does not provide any general criteria for the presumed notability of sports teams and clubs. Some sports have specific criteria. Otherwise, teams and clubs are expected to demonstrate notability by the general notability guideline.'

It's good that the sourcing issue seems to be fixed and that you are happier with that. I am now wanting to ensure that the notability is good also. There are a number of other sources that I could cite, but which are hidden behind paywalls. They are from sport-specific newspapers. Can you explain to me how I reference these, and how you will be able to personally check their content to enable this submission to get over the line please? That would be really helpful!

If you don't mind, would you just confirm in principle that you agree/disagree that an amateur sports club which sets a number of world firsts in terms of participation is, in theory, notable? I had hoped we have cornered this one off with the help of the previous moderator.

Finally, I would point you in the direction of a number of other Rugby League clubs with Wiki pages and pose the question, are these any more notable/well sourced than the one I am presenting here?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_East_Worcestershire_Ravens

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telford_Raiders

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leamington_Royals

Many thanks indeed for your help. Hovispride (talk) 13:04, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Mea culpa! In that case, focus on meeting WP:GNG. If you have better sources (even paywalled ones), feel free to add those and resubmit for another review. Just because WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS doesn't mean that this page will be accepted by the next reviewer, but you might be able to improve the draft through adding sources. Also, if you believe any pages don't meet notability guidelines, you can nominate them for deletion. BuySomeApples (talk) 13:35, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Haha! No problem. Thanks for the help. I have added two more strong articles from the League Express Newspaper, the largest UK newspaper specific to Rugby League. They are both behind a paywall, but the link is good for each, including page number. These articles are also published in print.

Would you mind having another look and let me know if you think I would now be good?

Thank you.

Hovispride (talk) 12:22, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

@Hovispride: I appreciate you adding those! I try not to review the same draft twice in a row, because I think it's more fair to let another reviewer take a look in most cases. BuySomeApples (talk) 22:04, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Adding Reliable Sources to I Woke Up a Vampire

I just add a new reliable source you you got to see for I Woke Up a Vampire72.69.238.8 (talk) 20:22, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! If you can find some reviews of the show or other coverage that would also help improve the draft. BuySomeApples (talk) 20:00, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Invitation

Hello BuySomeApples/2023, we need experienced volunteers.

• New Page Patrol is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles. We could use a few extra hands on deck if you think you can help.
• Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; Wikipedia needs experienced users to perform this task and there are precious few with the appropriate skills. Even a couple reviews a day can make a huge difference.
• Kindly read the tutorial before making your decision (if it looks daunting, don't worry, it basically boils down to checking CSD, notability, and title). If this looks like something that you can do, please consider joining us.
• If you would like to join the project and help out, please see the granting conditions. You can apply for the user-right HERE.
• If you have questions, please feel free to drop a message at the reviewer's discussion board.
• Cheers, and hope to see you around.

Sent by NPP Coordination using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:27, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

Draft: Memento Exclusives - WP:THREE Sources

Hi @BuySomeApples the Memento Exclusives page submission was rejected. You asked for three sources in the talk page. These three I think qualify as they talk about the company in depth, are from news sites/or an official brand, and are reliable: https://www.planetf1.com/features/tour-memento-exclusives-f1-authentics https://www.formulanerds.com/features/exclusive-inside-f1-authentics-f1s-11th-team/ https://corp.formula1.com/formula-1-announces-online-memorabilia-store-in-partnership-with-memento-group/

Thanks Z4r4$m1th123 (talk) 11:03, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Z4r4$m1th123: I answered you on your talk page btw. Thank you! BuySomeApples (talk) 01:12, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Will Johnson (pollster)

Hi, BuySomeApples. I received a decline notice for Draft:Will Johnson (pollster) and was hoping you can help me out. The previous reviewer noted that this RBJ reference was reliable, but was not sure about independence and asked for multiple sources. The resubmission included two more references which talk in-depth about Johnson. These include Investor's Business Daily, which goes into detail about his hiring, his role at the organization, his previous employment, and his education; and The Globe and Mail, which does the same. I am hoping you can take another look at these references and let me know what else would be needed to show notability for this individual. Doctorstrange617 (talk) 18:44, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi, BuySomeApples. Was hoping to get your feedback on this draft when you have a moment. Doctorstrange617 (talk) 21:31, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Doctorstrange617: most of the reliable sources in the draft are either not independent (such as interviews) or they do not demonstrate notability for William Johnson as an individual. Most of the articles only talk about or interview him in relation to the Harris Poll, which already has a page. BuySomeApples (talk) 17:27, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Got it. I understand, and thanks again for your input. Doctorstrange617 (talk) Doctorstrange617 (talk) 20:54, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

No problem! BuySomeApples (talk) 01:57, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Adding sources to F. Ralph Gervers

I used "Public records available to researchers" because that is similar to a difficult to access citation used on a similar profile for another vaudeville producer/impresario, Tony Pastor. (Under Later Career, where it says "The business records from this period are available to researchers.") F. Ralph Gervers's birth, death, and marriage are accessible through the Florida State Census but I do not know how to attach those. Is the state census considered an approved Wikipedia source? There are 147 articles about him on Newspapers.com, so when I have more time I can continue to source. He was notable in other ways but will need to continue to do more research as I go through vaudeville records. Thank you. Dlothcreb (talk) 18:07, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Dlothcreb: thank you for explaining! Wikipedia articles need to be verifiable (this page explains this guideline well), so specific citations need to be used. Census records are considered primary sources which are allowed, but secondary sources are preferred. It's also important to avoid adding any original research of your own to the page because that isn't accepted by Wikipedia. I tagged the issues on the Tony Pastor article so that other editors might help to improve it. BuySomeApples (talk) 21:55, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi @BuySomeApples, thanks for your patience with this! I just edited the F Ralph Gervers page to make sure proper citations were included for his birth, and also added some additional information from a couple different article features and books I found regarding his birthdate, his childhood, inspiration in his youth, and some shows he produced. I found a biographical photo of him in the Cincinnati Enquirer as part of a larger article about him, so I have that ready to be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons (it's from 1923) and if this article is indeed approved, I will add the photo. Thanks very much for your help. Dlothcreb (talk) 21:09, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

You removed code

From the instruction here. I'll fix it. Please be careful next time. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:49, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Oops, thanks @Piotrus: I'll be more careful next time. BuySomeApples (talk) 05:11, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

review of submission

Hi. You said that seems no significant changes since past AfD, which sounds like mocking of me cause I have no idea how it was looks like before. But one user helped me and found in internet-archive the previous content to evade CSD G4. Refernece: https://web.archive.org/web/20231028000951/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitget So after I saw that, reviewer's comment sounds like mocking of me. Please show some respect and take a look & compare before rejecting ,thx. I feel an ungrateful environment Antonio Vinzaretti (talk) 07:07, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

"any significant changes" what you asked for? Sorry, but I waste my weekend for that, and you just declined. And why should I take responsibility on previous AfD about I had no clue ROFL. Even when I look at webarchive now and on my version I has'nt see any evidence of violation WP:NCORP, WP SIRS, WP:GNG WP:CORPDEPTH WP:REFBOMB.

Why I learn guidelines where reviewer just cant open eyes and compare lol. It will be kind if you clarify where is the problem, no? Because how can I understand? Antonio Vinzaretti (talk) 07:14, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

The rejection and decline messages at the top of the draft link to pages which explain Wikipedia guidelines. These might help you to understand why the draft was rejected. BuySomeApples (talk) 07:31, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

I have an idea. If you has'nt time to compare and appreciate my efforts (I not feel now I can continue on my further wished kucoin, whitebit, qmall, mexc, etc....) lets nominate it to AfD in the mainspace, thx. Antonio Vinzaretti (talk) 07:18, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Antonio Vinzaretti: it's not your fault that the page was deleted before but the company hasn't become more notable since then. If available sources don't demonstrate notability, no amount of effort can save the page. It also does not make sense to recreate the page and send it to AfD again just to get deleted. I'm sorry if you feel your efforts were wasted. I can see that another recommended that you spend more time editing articles to familiarize yourself with Wikipedia guidelines, and I think that might be very rewarding for you. BuySomeApples (talk) 07:31, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

"available sources don't demonstrate notability" Q: which one source which exist in former AfD is present on my article and violate any guideline? Yes, I violated WPCOPYVIO yesterday, but I fixed that, no? Antonio Vinzaretti (talk) 07:32, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

I want create kucoin, whitebit, qmall and too many too. But as I checked they all was created and deleted before me. Sounds like no sense... Antonio Vinzaretti (talk) 07:35, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

@Antonio Vinzaretti: If those pages were deleted for lack of notability, then you should probably double-check that they meet notability requirements before attempting to create them. I understand from personal experience that it can be frustrating to work on a draft only for it to be rejected because of notability. BuySomeApples (talk) 07:52, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Sources #18, 16, 21, 14, 13, 12, 10, 4, 2 is'nt third-party significant coverage reliable references? I'm wasting time. You're just focusing on the consensus of the past AfD, and the decision to reject is focused on a version that doesn't even exist. because I developed mine. You even not taken look on my sources 100%. Because where logic hide while you mention me your argument haha Antonio Vinzaretti (talk) 07:40, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

@Antonio Vinzaretti: No, those sources do not meet the requirements of WP:NCORP. This isn't a personal attack on you or your editing, I can see that you worked very hard, it's just that your draft isn't ready to be published and the company doesn't seem to meet notability requirements. BuySomeApples (talk) 07:52, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Which one? Looks like you're just trying to justify your hasty review Antonio Vinzaretti (talk) 07:54, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

None of them do @Antonio Vinzaretti: They are routine coverage, most of them about a specific lawsuit involving a more notable company. I understand that you have had a difficult time so far, but if you take the time to read the guidelines, you will have a much easier time contributing. BuySomeApples (talk) 07:59, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted

Hi BuySomeApples. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group. Please check back at the permissions page in case your user right is time-limited or probationary. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encyclopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page or ask via the NPP Discord. In addition, please remember:

• Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging pages for maintenance so that they are aware.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
• If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
• Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page, including checking for copyright violations using Earwig's copyright violation detector, checking for duplicate articles, and evaluating sources (both in the article, and if needed, via a Google search) for compliance with the general notability guideline.
• Please review some of our flowcharts (1, 2) to help ensure you don't forget any steps.
• Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. If you can read any languages other than English, please add yourself to the list of new page reviewers with language proficiencies. – Joe (talk) 11:34, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Awesome! BuySomeApples (talk) 12:02, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Request a review

Hi can you review my article Draft:Torres Castle (Al Hoceima) It is a prominent heritage architecture in the region. Can you review it? Ali Maalouf (talk) 20:09, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Generally pages get reviewed kind of at random but yeah I'll take a look @Ali Maalouf:. BuySomeApples (talk) 20:12, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, I hope you make an appropriate decision Ali Maalouf (talk) 20:13, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Note

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005%E2%80%9306_UEFA_Champions_League_qualifying_rounds

This and possibly more seasons have wrong steaua link, another merge argument. It is legally fcsb from history article sources. 93.140.145.143 (talk) 20:29, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Draft; To Catch the Sun

Thanks for helping me with the To Catch the Sun article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:To_Catch_the_Sun.

I found a second Forbes article - so between those two, the CTV article which is pretty good and has video - but I could not figure out how to include the video itself, and then the excerpts reprinted in several different venues - and citation in Google Scholar 14 times, is that enough to cross the notability line?

As to encyclopedic tone - which sentences are incorrect? I tried to just say factual things backed up by the references at the end of each sentence.

Thanks Taylorswify (talk) 18:12, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi! @Taylorswify: Unfortunately I don't think the addition of those sources meets the criteria for notability. As for tone, the article is overall okay but there are a few points that aren't encyclopedic. For example, describing the book as "a collection of stories intended to be inspiring of different communities from various places throughout the world coming together to harness solar energy to meet their needs." This part doesn't sound neutral and it's a bit grammatically clunky too. Some sections, like the list of DIY build styles and contents, should probably be removed. I would focus on finding better sources first, since the page can't be published without those. After that, you can take your time working on the article itself. BuySomeApples (talk) 20:03, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

I found a full review of it and added it - and that along with the CTV news article which was only about it I think meet the Noteability standards. I will fix that sentence. I think the list of what is in the book is objectively useful, but if you disagree - just delete that section instead of rejecting it. Thanks. Taylorswify (talk) 22:40, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for participating in AfC November 2023 Backlog Drive

		The Articles for Creation Barnstar
		Thank you for your participation in the Articles for Creation's November 2023 Backlog Drive! You made a total of 177 reviews, for a total of 264.5 points. – robertsky (talk) 06:45, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Regarding Draft:Louisa Lawson House

Dear BuySomeApples, thank you for having a look at my draft. I did add page numbers to book citations 3,4,5 using {{rp}}, and the only other book I have cited is number 8, "A feminist Approach to Madness". Such a large percentage of the book discusses the bureaucratization of the organisation, so it didn't really seem appropriate to leave a page number for that one specifically. I will note that citation 7 is an archival collection and not a book, just a bunch of documents organised in boxes. Darcyisverycute (talk) 01:18, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

That makes sense @Darcyisverycute: thanks for explaining! BuySomeApples (talk) 08:59, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Happy holidays!

– robertsky (talk) is wishing you Happy Holidays! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user Happy Holidays, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Happy holidays}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

– robertsky (talk) 06:45, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Happy holidays to you too @Robertsky:! BuySomeApples (talk) 09:03, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings

Merry Christmas, BuySomeApples/2023! Wishing you Season's Greetings and a Happy Winter Solstice! As the year comes to a close, I want to express my appreciation for your dedicated efforts on Wikipedia and extend heartfelt thanks for your assistance throughout the years. May the holiday season bring you and your loved ones abundant joy, good health, and prosperity.

RV (talk) 08:45, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Happy holidays and a wonderful winter solstice to you as well @RAJIVVASUDEV:! BuySomeApples (talk) 09:04, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Draft: David James Nielson

Hi there BuySomeApples, thanks for looking at my draft, I jut have a couple questions I was hoping you could help me with. A lot of the sources for the information are physical documents in my possession, and so I was wondering how I should reference them on the page. Is there a way for me to scan the documents and then put them on wikipedia? Thanks Kai110ux (talk) 13:33, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

That's a tough one @Kai11oux: you want to be careful to avoid WP:Original research and WP:Synth which might be difficult if you're using primary sources. However, you can definitely cite print-only works, just use an inline reference like you would for any other source (minus the URL). BuySomeApples (talk) 09:01, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Okay great I’ll do that then, thanks for the help! However, if I do that won’t there be problems for wiki editors like yourself in verifying the information presented in the article? Thanks again Kai110ux (talk) 09:38, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Technically, yes @Kai110ux: but Wikipedia still allows WP:OFFLINE sources. Sometimes, the best sources available just aren't digitized. If print publications are all you've got then that's OK. BuySomeApples (talk) 08:31, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

DRAFT: Peter L. P. Dillon

Thanks for reviewing my draft. I have deleted one reference and added several new references which I believe are reliable.

I am an expert in the field of digital photography and digital imaging. Dillon is indeed one of the most notable inventors of imaging technology - he invented the technology that enables your smartphone to take color photos. But he retired before the importance of his work was recognized. So there are no in-depth articles written specifically about his career at Kodak.

Comment: This person is very likely notable but some of the sources are unreliable (see WP:RS), and it would also help to have more in-depth and independent articles or other sources that talk about Dillon / his inventions. Do you think you can make these changes? Once that's done, it'll probably be ready for mainspace. BuySomeApples (talk) 17:46, 23 December 2023 (UTC) KAPcooney (talk) 19:11, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you @KAPcooney: I'm gonna take a look at the refs now. It's unfortunate to hear that there isn't much written about him, Wikipedia determines WP:Notability based on metrics like the amount of scholarship or reporting on a topic. There are special notability guidelines for scientists (WP:NACADEMIC) but I'm not sure if he'll be able to meet any of them. BuySomeApples (talk) 20:07, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick response. Please understand that Peter's papers and patents are widely cited by others working in the field of color imaging, and there's a great deal of reporting on the topics of Peter's research, such as color video cameras, smart phone cameras, etc. My statement was merely that not much is written about Peter's personal life. In fact, not much is written about the personal lives of most research scientists who work in industry, compared to academia.

In any case, I've just taken a look at WP:Notability and its clear that Peter Dillon meets both of the first two Criteria:

1. The person's research has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources. Peter's impact on digital photography has been highly significant, as demonstrated by the quote from the curator of the Technology Collection at the George Eastman Museum, Todd Gustavson, who stated that "the color sensor technology developed by Peter Dillon has revolutionized all forms of color photography". The George Eastman Museum is one of the most a highly respected, independent reliable sources for the history of photography. Please check their website: https://www.eastman.org/about
2. The person has received a highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level. Peter received a Technology and Engineering Emmy Award in 2019 for “Pioneering Development of the Single-Chip Color Camera" from the National Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. It is highly unusual (and highly prestigious) for the Academy to award a Technology and Engineering Emmy to an individual scientist, rather than a company. At the award ceremony, the many hundreds of attendees (most of whom represented the most significant companies in the industry) gave Peter a standing ovation for his work. In addition, in 2022 he received the IEEE Masaru Ibuka Consumer Electronics Award for “Contributions to the development of image sensors with integrated color filter arrays for digital video and still cameras". This is an international award from the IEEE, and the most prestigious award that could be given to a scientist or engineer working on consumer electronics devices. The previous year, the award was given to Steve Wozniak, the technical genius who co-founded Apple with Steve Jobs.

KAPcooney (talk) 21:28, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you @KAPcooney: I think those 2 points (especially the awards) adequately demonstrate notability, I've gone ahead and approved the draft. BuySomeApples (talk) 08:57, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing this article, and approving the draft. KAPcooney (talk) 16:54, 26 December 2023 (UTC)