Talk:David Meerman Scott/GA2

GA Reassessment

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Lack of Reliable Sources

The first cite is a press release, and 10 of the subject's books are quoted making this whole article appear more like an autobiography than an encyclopedia article. The issue here is that the article rests primarily on the subject's own words. WP:SELFPUB

Example: 2nd Lead Paragraph - "The book was inspired by an accidental discovery (made when he was vice president of marketing at NewsEdge) that creating useful content oneself and publishing it on-line at virtually no cost was consistently more effective than expensive profession public relations programs..." Source? The subject.

Non-NPOV

Example: Occupation - "thought leader" This is a recognized occupation? According to Wikipedia's definition of it, this is either as a 'catchphrase' or 'characterization'.

Original Research

Example: "Scott's belief that this idea was not only valuable but also innovative was confirmed when The Thomson Corporation terminated his employment after acquiring NewsEdge." Who is making this conclusion?

Undue

Example: A paragraph and photograph about subject's previous ad hoc employment taken only from subject's own sources? "While in Tokyo he had a sideline as a male model and actor, culminating in a performance in NHK Hall as an extra in the 1988 Teatro alla Scala." - Another concern with this whole passage is the contentious quote from an unnamed assistant director about using white people costumed as Asians. (-EBY (talk) 23:21, 8 June 2013 (UTC))[reply]

Premature use of GAR

On the GAR page I directed you to it says "Fix any simple problems yourself. Do not waste minutes explaining or justifying a problem that you could fix in seconds. GAR is not a forum to shame editors over easily fixed problems." I think you should suspend this until you have proposed changes either in a sandbox or live. In any case, I don't have time to respond fully right now. I can to it next Saturday at the earliest. Cheers! Woz2 (talk) 17:21, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

None of what you wrote applies to this GA/R. The problems are not simple. None of this can be quickly fixed. Additional sourcing needs to be researched & applied, quotes, tone all should be reviewed. I am not withdrawing the GA/R and there is absolutely no burden on the editor opening a GA/R to make or sandbox changes. EBY (talk) 17:37, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not so. Example: "thought leader" Solution, delete it. Woz2 (talk) 18:07, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Another example, the quote from the la scala producer in the "Toyko" episode. Kinda interesting, but not very important. Delete it. Woz2 (talk) 18:12, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also what have you done "to notify major contributors to the article and the relevant Wikiprojects. The aim is not to delist the article, but to fix it." (WP:GAR) Not seeing anything in your contribs. Also your edit comment with http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:David_Meerman_Scott&diff=prev&oldid=558801479 Checked peer review, article never passed as "Good" is factually incorrect. Please see the talk page. Woz2 (talk) 18:24, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also "Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves" (WP:SELFPUB, my emphasis).

Also a book published by John Wiley is not self-published. Woz2 (talk) 19:03, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

By "not easily fixed", I meant not "not easily fixed by me". But I need no explanation or defense; I am walking the process as requested. Please do not bite the reviewer. EBY (talk) 19:28, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not biting, and you are not following. If you don't like the phrase "thought leader", then delete from the article rather than dragging it out here. And if you don't like the La Scala anecdote, delete it. Woz2 (talk) 19:33, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It may not seem as if you are biting but please stop telling me how to apply WP:Be Bold. When I have margin, I'll circle round. In the meantime, if deleting things is fair to subject, please do so instead of chiding me. EBY (talk) 19:58, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You can either follow the process outlined on WP:GAR or not. It's entirely your call. Woz2 (talk) 20:04, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed

I fixed all the issues you raised. But I believe you could have done it yourself in two minutes without all this overhead. Also could you please re-read the policy that you cite. In particular, WP:SELFPUB says "Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves" (my emphasis). Also please note that a book published by a respected publisher like John Wiley is not self-published. Thanks. Woz2 (talk) 11:33, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]