Jump to content

User talk:Unbroken Chain

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Recent Changes

[edit]
List of abbreviations (help):
D
Edit made at Wikidata
r
Edit flagged by ORES
N
New page
m
Minor edit
b
Bot edit
(±123)
Page byte size change

18 November 2024

18 November 2024


Draft:Jeffrey Gale

[edit]

Hi Unbroken Chain! Thank you for taking the time to review Draft:Jeffrey Gale. Your note suggested that it was "Close but not enough 3rd party coverage IMO to pass the GNG". I don't know what GNG means, perhaps you could explain. How many additional references of what quality would you recommend to allow its acceptance? "IMO" suggests that another reviewer might think differently, but I'd rather succeed with your advice. Thank you, again. Cheers, HopsonRoad (talk) 11:21, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning User:HopsonRoad. I'm sorry I should have hyperlinked this better. The GNG is the General Notability Guideline, found here WP:GNG. More specifically this subsection seems to fit best [subsection]. Sources like this [[1]] tell us that he exists and makes very nice baskets, very nice if I say so myself but this doesn't provide in-depth coverage of his work or why it is notable. This here is an excellent source [[2]] and more like it will help move the notability bar. This source is more about Emerson and only mentions in passing his father but not how he is notable [[3]]. The other concern is that the pictures you have uploaded to the article appear to have been taken from VTfolklife and the copyright status may not be in a good place for those images. There is no set number of sources here, just a totality of the situation and presentation. It seems like if you find a couple more reliable third party sources, or WP:RS, that explain his notability better the article would likely survive a deletion review. As to whether another person would approve your article, they might, however that doesn't guarantee the article would survive and any editor could make a WP:PROD deletion req or start a deletion discussion via WP:AFD. I don't think written as is at this point it would survive a deletion discussion, certainly a competent professional but need to know more about why he is a notable one. Unbroken Chain (talk) 12:22, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your prompt and thoughtful reply, Unbroken Chain. First, I should assure you that the photos are all mine, properly uploaded at Wikimedia, e.g. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jeffrey_Gale_with_egg_basket.jpg. There's probably a paywall that prevented you from reading it, but the Valley News citation was a two-page spread. (I could email you a pdf, if you wished.) The articles that I have seen tell pretty much the same story. Of note to me is the acquisition of his work by the Smithsonian Institution. With the Valley News, included, I might hope that one additional article could suffice. Cheers, HopsonRoad (talk) 12:50, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's great on the images, that's an area I am lacking at and never totally learned and hence why I didn't tag it for deletion or the copyright warning stuff :) . Definitely have written a lot of articles though, especially on people with "fringe" notability when it comes to WP inclusion merits. The Smithsonian is a step in the right direction but the GNG for creatives is that the subject should be in multiple galleries and museums, likewise there needs to be more then one piece of coverage in the news that provides more then a passing mention. It needs in depth coverage in multiple sources. The facts here are that there are quite a few reviewers outside of myself and they may well see the notability differently and if you feel that those things you mention bring it to the level it needs to survive, then feel free to resubmit with changes you feel do that. Wikipedia is run on WP:Consensus and often enough consensus has been with or against my ideas from time to time so a different reviewer may see it differently or apply a different notability standard they feel fits more! A review is just my opinion and I hold no special privileges or ranks other than the ability to help review these, in other words I can err :). Unbroken Chain (talk) 13:21, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
One last thought, is there things like this for the smithsonian [[4]]? See the difference how it's presented rather than raw images? Unbroken Chain (talk) 13:38, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Unbroken Chain, I have edited the draft article to a level that I feel it meets WP:BASIC. I have added three additional references: 1) Bell, Nicholas R. whose references to Gale are cited by page number in the text, 2) Borden, Elissa: WCAX television interview and commentary, and 3) "A Measure of the Earth: The Cole-Ware Collection of American Baskets | Smithsonian American Art Museum". I suggest that if the Smithsonian regards his work as noteworthy enough to collect and display that should suffice, given that a basket maker doesn't fit the description of creative professionals (WP:CREATIVE). I've added material from Bell and Smithsonian that combine to describe the notability of the craftspeople in the Cole-Ware collection, IMO. I look forward to seeing whether this puts us over the top. It seems to me that the topic is more notable than topics like North Sterling State Park or Mancos State Park, which don't have broad coverage. Cheers, HopsonRoad (talk) 19:45, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. I appreciate your point on the articles you mention above, both of which I authored. The difference here is that some topics have inherent notability like it or not, state and national Parks are one of those, another is high schools are inherently notable even when they are not ( I will forever complain about that one). National Historic Sites are always considered notable too by default, it can boggle the mind but that is what consensus has determined. Sometimes clear cut things can be less clear cut dependent on consensus. Let me also use a personal example Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeffrey Allen Sinclair is an article I wrote (Hell in a Bucket was my old username. Big Grateful Dead fan) and I still believe to this day as a brigadier general this man passed the GNG for military folks and also had a lot of focused coverage on a sexual assault case. Ended up deleted because there wasn't enough 3rd party coverage to show more on that individual outside of the sexual assault stuff. There is a problem with sources like this [[5]], this says he exists the year he was born and where he works but not why he is notable. We might be able to look and say hey those baskets are probably his but with our sources guideline that would be a WP:SYNTH. We can't connected those things as common sense as that might seem to be. I think you are misunderstanding what I'm saying, I'm not questioning his notability I think it's clear he has notability. I'm saying the way it is supported in 3rd party sources has been inadequate. Some of the sources as I have noted in the past mentioned him in passing and spoke more in depth on his son. If you feel like you've done enough to establish notability, move it to main space. AFC is a good avenue for those with conflicts of interest, just starting or sometimes under restrictions but it is not mandatory and I won't initiate deletion discussions on your article personally. You do run the risk of Speedy Deletion nomination but a claim to notability on the talk page is enough to stop that. You run the risk of WP:PROD deletion but you can simply delete that template yourself or you could have an WP:AFD request which is a longer more drawn out process as you can see from mine. Possibly none of the above immediately. I still think it's close, closer now with your additions and I am ok with another person reviewing so they can give you an opinion or you can publish yourself if you feel it is ready and you are ready and aware of the potential paths this could take. Whatever happens if deletion requests happen they aren't personal and if you comport yourself as you did here, you will do splendidly. Unbroken Chain (talk) 20:27, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your insights and kind words, Unbroken Chain. I'll see how it fares in the article space. Cheers, HopsonRoad (talk) 20:40, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Unbroken_Chain&oldid=1250655302"