User talk:Chief2443
This is the User talk:Chief2443 page, which means its for contacting me. If you do not wish to contact me, you are in the wrong place. Posting below for communication would be encouraged and appreciated for feedback on articles made by, edits done by, or deletions made by User:Chief2443. Positive feedback is wonderful and of course is aligned with the Wikipedia talk page guidelines. Thank you. Chief2443 (talk) 03:07, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
Ways to improve Glade Knight
[edit]Hi, I'm JamesG5. Chief2443, thanks for creating Glade Knight!
I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Heavily slanted piece, does not maintain WP:NPOV. Appears to be written as a promotional piece glossing over business issues. Other than prosecution, it's hard to see where subject meets WP:GNG, and there are too few WP:RS to show it.
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.
JamesG5 (talk) 06:26, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
- Page also has no categories, and is overly detailed on unimportant issues. JamesG5 (talk) 06:27, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Chief. Responding to the message you left on my Talk page. Most of your references are not actually linked to any sources, they're just names & dates. The three actual references you DO have in the Notes section aren't footnoted anywhere. You do appear to gloss over the controversy, and multiple sections like this "So long as they all stay well behaved, he loves to spoil his four adult children just as much as his 13 grandchildren" are WP:NPOV publicity that's absolutely unacceptable in a proper article. You're also inconsistent in referring to him as Glade Knight vs just Knight, simply using his last name would be correct. There are no categories. You're pretty much dead on regarding the points as you put them on my page. This reads like a press release from the LDS church or his corporate PR department. JamesG5 (talk) 04:25, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
- There should not be a "Notes" section and a "References" section, just a "References" section, everything belongs in there and it should all be footnoted to its proper places in the article. See WP:CITEand WP:REFBEGIN for more. The Help page for categories is at H:CAT. So far as meeting the Wikipedia general notability guideline you need to focus on things he's done that actually merit encyclopedia status. Just being a wealthy businessman or church leader doesn't necessarily do it. The controversy actually counts in this regard. News about his horse racing plays in. Anything that's brought him press attention you can show reliable sources (per WP:RS) for, basically. Show WHY he's important enough to be here. Believe it or not, it's easier for a beetle to rate an article (even a stub) than a person. JamesG5 (talk) 05:59, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
- One thing to keep in mind is the math... there're a billion of those beetles, and they get one short blurb to describe them all. Humans get a more detailed page, but it describes all 7 billion of us in general. Any given one of us has to stand out in some way to warrant more than that, or Wikipedia would be nothing but pages about us. :-) JamesG5 (talk) 06:33, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
- There should not be a "Notes" section and a "References" section, just a "References" section, everything belongs in there and it should all be footnoted to its proper places in the article. See WP:CITEand WP:REFBEGIN for more. The Help page for categories is at H:CAT. So far as meeting the Wikipedia general notability guideline you need to focus on things he's done that actually merit encyclopedia status. Just being a wealthy businessman or church leader doesn't necessarily do it. The controversy actually counts in this regard. News about his horse racing plays in. Anything that's brought him press attention you can show reliable sources (per WP:RS) for, basically. Show WHY he's important enough to be here. Believe it or not, it's easier for a beetle to rate an article (even a stub) than a person. JamesG5 (talk) 05:59, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Chief. Responding to the message you left on my Talk page. Most of your references are not actually linked to any sources, they're just names & dates. The three actual references you DO have in the Notes section aren't footnoted anywhere. You do appear to gloss over the controversy, and multiple sections like this "So long as they all stay well behaved, he loves to spoil his four adult children just as much as his 13 grandchildren" are WP:NPOV publicity that's absolutely unacceptable in a proper article. You're also inconsistent in referring to him as Glade Knight vs just Knight, simply using his last name would be correct. There are no categories. You're pretty much dead on regarding the points as you put them on my page. This reads like a press release from the LDS church or his corporate PR department. JamesG5 (talk) 04:25, 20 January 2017 (UTC)