User talk:Stellany/sandbox

December 2013 critique

Hi, Stellany. It's good to see you active again after 5 years away from the encyclopedia. You asked for a critique so...

First, external links don't belong in the body of articles with a very few exceptions. I removed the links to Mark Z's law firm. Some other editor would do the same if the article appeared in main space.

Next, the lead paragraph is vague and contains peacock terms.

The first paragraph under Early life and education says little about Mark Z. That his father held a patent and the unsupported-by-citation claim of development work on a proximity fuse has nothing to do with Mark Z. The details about his step-father are also irrelevant. It gives the impression that you're padding the article.

Under Professional history, most of the references barely mention Mark Z. To establish notability, you need to find articles about him or that at least contain substantial content about him.

Finally, my impression from a Google search is that Mark Zauderer is a very good lawyer but not a suitable subject for an encyclopedic article. Hope you can find better sources to establish notability. Take care, DocTree (ʞlɐʇ·cont) Join WER 04:42, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Doctree, thank you for your critique. It's very helpful, especially since I haven't edited a page in a very long time. I made substantially changes to the page since your last post: removing the step father paragraph and adding more reference, but I still need to look for more cites that are substantially about Mark Z. If I understand you correctly, Mark Z mentioned in an article about the Grasso case does not do enough to establish notability?? Stellany (talk) 17:01, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]