Talk:Stewart Shining

Latest comment: 1 day ago by Mitsoukorussie in topic Proposal for Deletion

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Stewart Shining. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:18, 23 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Discussion on the Notability and Sourcing Concerns of the Stewart Shining Article edit

Hello fellow editors,

I have reviewed the current Stewart Shining article and found several issues regarding sourcing and notability that need to be addressed. Below is a detailed list of the sources currently used, along with specific concerns for each:

1. Broken Links or Unavailable Sources:

2. Links That Do Not Verify Notability or Credibility:

  • Articles like “Goddess of the Mediterranean” from CNN/Sports Illustrated and various Rolling Stone mentions (e.g., "'N Sync - RS 837") cite Shining's work but do not contribute to establishing his notability as they do not discuss his role or influence substantively.

3. Overreliance on Primary Sources:

4. Misrepresentation of Roles or Inaccurate Information:

Given these issues, I propose we discuss the potential need for major edits to ensure compliance with Wikipedia’s verifiability and notability standards. We might need to consider deleting non-compliant sections or even nominating the page for deletion if notability cannot be established with better sources.

I welcome any input, additional observations, or suggestions for reliable secondary sources that could be used to improve the article.

Thank you for your attention and contributions. Mitsoukorussie (talk) 18:52, 22 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Proposal for Deletion edit

Hello fellow editors,

After careful review and consideration, I am proposing the deletion of the Stewart Shining article due to significant concerns about the notability and sourcing of the content. Despite my efforts to engage in discussions and seek improvements or validations for the content, there has been a lack of response and no significant contributions addressing these concerns.

Here are the main issues that lead to this proposal:

  1. Broken and Unreliable Sources: Many of the sources cited in the article are either broken or do not meet the reliability standards required by Wikipedia. This includes archived links that no longer provide verifiable information and sources that do not substantively discuss the subject's notability.
  2. Overreliance on Primary Sources: The article relies heavily on primary sources or sources that are closely connected to the subject, which may introduce bias and do not adequately demonstrate the subject's notability from a neutral point of view.
  3. Lack of Independent Coverage: There is a significant lack of independent, reliable sources that discuss the subject's contributions in a manner that meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines for biographies of living people.

Given these points, and in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policies, I believe that a community discussion via the Articles for Deletion (AfD) process is warranted to determine if this article should be retained, altered, or deleted. I invite all interested editors to participate in this discussion to reach a consensus based on Wikipedia's guidelines and standards.

Thank you for your attention and contributions to this matter. Mitsoukorussie (talk) 04:46, 29 April 2024 (UTC)Reply