Talk:Alpine Fellowship

21:12:58, 1 June 2017 review of submission by 67.133.97.98

• 67.133.97.98 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:The Alpine Fellowship (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Dear Sir,

you mention that the source references in our article aren't substantial enough to adequately show the subject's notability. I just want to understand whether you think that the sources we have lack credibility, or whether the sources are fine, it's just that there aren't enough there yet. The sources we cite are the Financial Times, Vanity Fair, Spectator, NYU and Focus Online, all of which, I would assume, are very credible sources from a variety of fields (journalism, entertainment, education) that generate millions and millions of daily unique visitors. Or is the problem with the content of the articles that come from these sources? Please help me understand, so that we can address this and move on. Many thanks!

I have copied your message from my talk page to here, the article talk page, since it is about the article.

These are reliable sources, and you can use them to provide verification of the facts that you've included in the article. However for the purposes of establishing the notability of the subject, they fall short. The draft article is about the organisation known as The Alpine Fellowship, but the works you've cited aren't about the organisation. They are about events the organisation has organised. Imagine for a moment that a concert promoter called "Big Events Inc" that over the years had produced concerts for some of the world's most famous bands. Imagine there was a draft article about "Big Events Inc". The references in the article were about the amazing Coldplay concert they produced in 2015, the amazing Elton John concert they staged in 2016, etc. If those articles are about how amazing the band performed, what songs they played, how big the crowd was and how great the atmosphere was, but only made a passing mention that it was produced by Big Events Inc, then those sources wouldn't be providing significant coverage of the subject of the article, which is the company, not the event.

In the case of The Alpine Fellowship, are there reliable independent sources that have written about the history of the organisation, how/when/where it was founded, its principles, etc, and have commented on them, rather than just stating what they are? It is ok if the sources mention the events too, as long as they provide substantial coverage about the organisation. Find a couple of good such sources, reference them, and then resubmit.

(Oh, and the NYU page doesn't help, because it is an affiliated rather than independent source, and I expect the Fellowship provided that text.)

I hope this helps! Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 08:08, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Curb Safe Charmer, thanks a lot for the reply. I understand much better now what the issue is. You are right, there isn't a detailed article in there that talks at length about the nature of the organisation. I have gone through the articles again and copied the information that pertains directly to the organisation:

From the FT

A get-together of philosophers and artists on the shores of Loch Ness (bathed in improbable, Mediterranean-like sun) – the second edition of the Alpine Fellowship, convened by Jacob Burda (a philosopher from the German publishing family) and the realist painter Alan Lawson – was both bracing and heartening: it made me think that the essentially quiet, slow voice of philosophy remains indispensable, a sort of interior compass to guide our lives by.

From Vanity Fair

The Alpine Fellowship, an annual gathering of writers, artists and musicians, hosted its third event, for the first time in partnership with the Fondazione Cini, headquartered on the island of San Giorgio Maggiore in Venice.

From the Spectator

It is now home to Fondazione Giorgio Cini, a cultural institution and retreat sufficiently magnificent and isolated to have hosted the G7 meetings of 1980 and 1987. Last week it hosted the Alpine Fellowship, a gathering of philosophers, artists, writers and musicians.

From Focus Online

Zum dritten Mal schon eine Konferenz, in der die Philosophie und Ästhetik der neuen Medien durchdacht wird. Nicht als eine typisch akademische Tagung, sondern als ein interdisziplinärer Austausch, es waren Künstler, Dichter und Musiker eingeladen. In der Fondazione Giorgio Cini auf der Insel San Giorgio Maggiore in der Lagune von Venedig kam jetzt die Alpine Fellowship zu einem dreitägigen Kulturfest zusammen. Initiatoren sind der Maler Alan Lawson und Jacob Burda, intellektueller Chairman ist Roger Scruton, Professor der Philosophie.

The main points to extract from these sources seem to me that the 'Alpine Fellowship' is 1) a 'gathering of writers, philosophers, artist and musicians', 2) was founded by Alan Lawson and Jacob Burda, 3) has been hosted five times 4) is repeatedly partnering with the fondazione cini.

You are right to point out that one can conceive the organisation as being different from the events they host. the issue with this is, however, that apart from the 4 points that I mention above, there isn't much more to the organisation other than the nature of the events it hosts and the kind of activities it is engaged in (mainly supporting young scholars, both from NYU and elsewhere).

I had gone through the articles in chronological order and tried to give an impression of the past events because that would give an impression of the kind of organisation that the Alpine Fellowship is: i.e. these are the kind of questions it asks, these are the kind of people that attend, these are the results achieved, etc.

I had initially just wanted to write a short entry that just mentions some of the basic points about the organisation that i mentioned above (which can be extracted from the sources), but I have then been asked to expand which is when I went through the articles to give an idea of the context in which it operates.

I guess bottom line what I am saying is that there isn't much substantial source material out there that discusses in detail the nature of the organisation independently from the events that it hosts. One of the main reasons for this is that the Fellowship IS the events that it puts on. So we seem to be faced with a choice of either drastically cutting down the content to include some of the brute facts I mention, or to wait until there is more that pertains 'directly to the organisation'. Or is there another option I am missing?

Many thanks for your advice and guidance! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.90.199.142 (talk) 12:22, 4 June 2017 (UTC)