User:JSFarman/Archive4/Archive 4

Articles for creation/AFerry

Thanks for you for your help and taking the extra time to write the comment about why the reference aren't up to scratch. I'll remove PR references and any references that are essentially made by AFerry (press releases, about us) and only leave the independent newspaper reviews. After doing this should I go back to you or resubmit? Also I don't have much time for this now is my article for creation in danger of deletion after a certain period of time of not resubmitting? Thanks once again especially for re-clarifying - to be honest I could have guessed that was the issue anyway! This is harder than I thought! A lot! But I do think we have enough independent references (not PR or based on PR). The Daily Mail article actually has some quite negative points about us! GoldenClockCar (talk) 10:35, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Helllo GoldenClockCar (talk), and thanks for the thanks. It took me a day to respond because I was trying to find out exactly how long a declined article could live at AfC before being deleted. Never found it, but I think it's six months. It won't be deleted anytime soon. When you're ready to resubmit it, you should go through the general AfC process, but leave a message here as well. I'm not sure I'll still be reviewing - it's incredibly time-consuming -- but if I am, I'll take a look at it. Thanks for getting in touch. JSFarman (talk) 14:11, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello JSFarman, okay thanks very very much for taking the time to look for that information. Good to know it won't disappear for a while in the AfC stage! Have a great day. I'll do as you say when it comes to resubmitting. Francis (real name) GoldenClockCar (talk) 09:32, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi JSFarman. I hope you're doing well :) Thanks again for everything so far. I resubmitted (fingers are firmly crossed!). Following your really helpful advice I got rid of the Press Release source and instead found a page on the Stena Line site which says the same thing - It's completely written by them - although we are partner companies. I also actually (for the first time LOL - should've done it before!) clicked on the find sources link and found quite a few quide book entries for us - these are not in depth but they are multiple and independent and verifiable so I'm helping they'll help with the dreaded "notability" (after reading this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:CORPDEPTH#Primary_criteria). Thanks very much for your help. Francis (real name) GoldenClockCar (talk) 17:37, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi Francis! (talk). Looks good to me - I just moved the article into the mainspace. Can't guarantee that it won't get changed -- I had a little bit of hesitation re: some of the content. Please make sure to add the connected contributor template to the talkpage (two curly brackets)Connected contributor|GoldenClockCar|GoldenClockCar|declared=yes(two curly brackets) and don't edit the page directly -- instead leave requested changes on the talk page. Thanks for your perseverance and the contribution! Julie

Hi, wow. Great news! Thanks very much. :) However, no sooner is it live than it has been triggered for deletion. :( ... Ehhh.. I feel terrible. It's like I can't win. I firmly believe the number (and also depth of coverage) is enough. Is there any advice you can give me to help prevent the deletion - which I am sure is inevitable. Any advice would be greatly appreciated! Thanks for everything - Francis AKA GoldenClockCar (talk) 17:42, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Hey Francis! (talk)- I'm sorry that happened. I thought it might, but I also believe that you've made a case for notability. Don't be convinced that the article will be deleted -- there needs to be a consensus - it's not just one opinion. (I'd weigh in but I'm obviously biased - I wouldn't have passed it if I didn't think you'd established notability.

DEF add the connected contributor tag to the talk page! Very important!

Hey to you too Julie! - Thanks very very much. I added the connected contributor tag and thanks very much for making me aware of its existence! :) I am sure that many people like me make articles with the a conflict of interest but can still achieve neutrality. It's also really good to know that not just one opinion can get rid of it at this stage! Small steps.. Thanks once again for everything. GoldenClockCar (talk) 12:37, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

The Scott Morrow Adventure trilogy

9 Oct 13

G'day JSFarman

Many thanks for your review of the page I wrote entitled The Scott Morrow Adventure trilogy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/The_Scott_Morrow_Adventure_trilogy).

I would appreciate any feedback and or guidance you can give me so I can correct the page ready for publication.

Cheers,Christopher 01:11, 9 October 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 7Lawrence (talk • contribs)

Hi Christopher (talk). I'm sorry to say but I think you're going to have a difficult time meeting the notability standards required. The guidelines are here Wikipedia: Notability (people). I did some searching for sources and didn't have much luck. Of course, that doesn't meant they're not out there - if you can come up with three independent reliable sources, you'll have more of a shot of getting your article published. Cheers! JSFarman (talk) 05:03, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	Thanks for going above and beyond! Very much appreciated. GoldenClockCar (talk) 09:35, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

ADVANFORT

	ADVANFORT
	PLEASE REVIEW MY ARTICLE, PLEASE BE FAIR, I DID EVERYTHING RIGHT! Jmartin77 (talk) 23:02, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi Jmartin77 (talk). The referencing looks much better! I'll spend more time with it later in the week. (There's not much room to be fair or not fair - it's all about following the guidelines.) JSFarman (talk) 23:25, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

AfC for Les Pendleton

Hello jsFarman, I'm trying to learn the ropes of AfC. There was an article you recently declined for a BLP, which I've updated slightly. They were in hollywood for a couple decades as a vehicle/set/etc manager, and have published a few books in their second career. I know almost nothing about hollywood BLP, but from your userpage it looks like you do. As for the author-stuff, they seem borderline-grey-area to me, because they have multiple independent sources, but that might not be enough, depending on how you count. Would appreciate it if you could give the paragraphs I've added to the the AfC in question a skim, and then help me understand where the invisible line is, by explaining how far under or over the line this particular case-study currently is. The formatting is not my interest here, as you can prolly guess once you peek.  :-) I'm just trying to grok WP:N and WP:RS in the context of an AfC for a BLP. Thanks. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 20:30, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi 74.192.84.101(talk). Phew. Yes, I totally get that your interest isn't in formatting! But you've got a good handle on what works and what doesn't - you've kind of answered your own questions.

But - I just did a pretty thorough Google search, and I think you're going to have a tough time establishing notability based on LP's work as an author (particularly since he's a co-writer) or for his production work. But let's do this:

• The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors. Author - No/Production - No
• The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique. Author - No/Production - No
• The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, that has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews. Author - No/Production No
• The person's work (or works) either (a) has become a significant monument no(b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition no (c) has won significant critical attention (No - the book reviews aren't from significant literary critics or significant literary publications) or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums. (Not relevant)

Also, the references need to be independent -- Deer Hawk Publishing and the Sea of Greed site aren't. IMDb isn't considered an independent source since the content is user-submitted and frequently self-generated. (The article from the local paper is valid.)

Hope this helps - but I don't think I'm telling you anything you don't already know...hit me back if you need more clarification, and glad you got in touch. I was bummed that you felt the way you did - Wikipedia wants you to contribute - and yeah, it can be confusing. JSFarman (talk) 00:36, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Anthony White submission

Hi, and thanks for reviewing the article I want to submit. This is the first one I've done so your advice is great. Can you just confirm that I need two sources for every bit of biographical information? I didn't realise that, so if that's the case I'll get onto editing it. I'll probably have to take a bit out as I've only found one source for much of the information. Thanks again. Creativeforrest (talk) 04:28, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Creativeforrest (talk). You don't need two sources for biographical info, just one (reliable) source so that the info can be verified - just make sure that everything you're reporting as fact is referenced. Also, blogs aren't considered reliable sources -- if you can find other references, it'd strengthen the article. Let me know after you've resubmitted it - if I'm around I'll take a look - thanks for getting in touch. JSFarman (talk) 06:29, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi again. I've just resubmitted the page. I've taken out all but anything I can substantiate through published sources or websites, but not blogs. If you have a chance to look at it, I'd be grateful. I hope I've understood now what is expected. Cheers Creativeforrest (talk) 11:34, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at AfC Martyn Lawrence Bullard was accepted

Martyn Lawrence Bullard, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Na-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

hmssolent\^{You rang?} _{ship's log} 07:11, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Connected Contributor

Please go through this list and add "Connected Contributor" to the article talk page where appropriate.

Then go through this list and if there is a coi, add the following or something like it below the "afc submission" and "afc comment" templates at the top but above the text of the submission:

{{afc comment|1=I have a conflict of interest in this submission. When this submission is accepted, please add the "connected contributor" template to the talk page. Thank you. ~~~~}}

Thanks. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 19:06, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) - Thanks. I added it to John Bard Manulis and Dana Beth Ardi. Tag is already on Owl (band). I didn't add it to Patti Webster; she was a friend/business associate and I did a Wiki page for her the day she died (which was shocking and horrible). Also - the Blackjacks article was one of my first - it got declined (and rightfully so). I have no intention of resubmitting it - now that I've been around a while I know they have no chance of establishing notability. Glad to have the right template for AfC submission - the one I was using didn't seem right. Thank you so much. JSFarman (talk) 19:20, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

My condolences on your loss, but if you were a business associate or a personal friend, you are connected. On a related note, consider digging through you photograph collection to see if you have any photos that you took of her that you can release under a free license to replace the existing photo. In general, a freely-licensed photo hosted on the Wikimedia Commons that is not of professional quality is preferable to a non-freely-licensed photo which is. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 19:32, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) - Done (and thanks for the condolences). Proud to have been connected to her. (I've been trying to find a photo - haven't succeeded yet.)

And now that we've sorted that out, will you show me how to archive this page?:) Don't think I should be leaving so many inactive discussions. Thanks! JSFarman (talk) 19:36, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

By the way, you can use either {{ping|usernamegoeshere}} or {{U|username goes here}} to get their attention. Also, for archiving, see Help:Archiving a talk page. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 19:44, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

On the general topic of COI editing: Even if you declare your COI, direct COI editing of article (or of submissions, once they become articles) other than to do things like remove copyright violations, remove false or unsourced harmful material from biographies of living persons, and to make non-content edits like fixing typos is almost never a good idea, and right now it's an even worse idea. You might want to read the last few issues of the Signpost to see why. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 00:35, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Davidwr! I've read the Signpost (even the articles that aren't about Wiki-PR), and everything related to COI, including the recent discussions re: paid editing and paid advocacy. Those areas I know well.

My primary concerns when creating and editing articles (the vast majority of which are unpaid) are (and always have been) NPOV, verifiability, and accuracy. I put every article through AfC and I trust that the reviewers there are applying the same stringent standards that I do. What I don't understand is the best way to disclose a conflict of interest, which is why I came to you for help. I know you're active in the discussions and that you know this area inside and out - I want to make sure I'm adhering to the guidelines -- and you seemed like the best person to ask. I'm aware that you're busy, and I'm sorry if my questions have been an imposition.JSFarman (talk) 15:36, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

That's good to hear. By the way, once you get to the point where your articles start "sailing through" AFC, you can and should skip the AFC process for anything in which you have absolutely no conflict of interest or even the appearance of one. I assume this is most of your articles. For AFC submissions, the best way to disclose a conflict is to put some text at the top of your submission, maybe prefaced with "Note for reviewer:" or "Attention reviewer:" or "This is going through AFC because..." or some such. Then if the submission is eventually approved, go back and make sure the approver put the connected contributor templates on the talk page and if he did not, place it yourself. Once the article exists as an article, do not make substantial edits, but rather make a suggestion on the talk page, mention your conflict of interest, and hope someone notices. If nobody notices within a reasonable time, post a note on a relevant WikiProject's talk page. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 16:13, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Sources

Hi, thanks for reviewing the article we submitted at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Trackit.

I'm at a loss as to how to proceed, we added a reference to something relevant we had done with a client, however it did not specifically mentioned Trackit, therefore it was declined. Now, after removing that reference it has been declined due to references?

This issue we have is that companies are looking for us and finding an alternative company with the same name https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TrackIT_Solutions, and because of the impact of Wikipedia on the web it's causing confusion.

We are extremely well known in our field, yet because we don't have random site references the article is being rejected?

Any help you can offer would be great.

Thanks

Mjpfx (talk) 08:19, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi Mjpfx.

• An organization is generally considered notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability. All content must be verifiable. If no independent, third-party, reliable sources can be found on a topic, then Wikipedia should not have an article on it. From WP:CORP.

You need independent sources (not the LinkedIn corporate profile or the corporate site), and Trackit must not only be mentioned, it must be featured significantly. You can't use an article to support the company's notability if the company isn't included in the article. (WP:N)

• Since you work for Trackit, it's very important to read this: WP:COI.
• The only reason to create an article on Wikipedia is to improve Wikipedia. You're looking to create an article to benefit your company. ("This issue we have is that companies are looking for us and finding an alternative company with the same name https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TrackIT_Solutions, and because of the impact of Wikipedia on the web it's causing confusion.")

Please spend some time reading Wikipedia articles - it'll help you understand the issue with the Trackit submission.

Thanks for getting in touch. JSFarman (talk) 15:47, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks again for your help with this.

Ultimately, we are trying to improve Wikipedia as currently it has no record of our organisation and instead shows another with the same name causing confusion.

Looking at the company page with the same name as us I fail to see any notable sources of any great worth other than what we have provided?

I'm genuinely at a loss as to what to add to the page. Wikipedia benefits from acknowledging our existence alongside the similarly named company, yet I cannot add because another website or notable resource has any remarks about us?

I'd rather not have to create the entry altogether as it does not greatly benefit us being on Wikipedia, however Wikipedia is creating confusion in our marketplace by only acknowledging the other companies existence but there is no record of ours.

Again, thank you for your help with this. I really do understand how Wikipedia works and how articles should be constructed, but it is a source of information and without our article it is lacking the information important to people trying to find out who we are.

Mjpfx (talk) 18:45, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi again Mjpfx. Please see comment Davidwr left on your talk page. He explained the issue well. JSFarman (talk) 15:32, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Thomas Heberer (Musician), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Dave Douglas, Bob Moses and Andreas Schmidt (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 20:15, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Possibly unfree files

Some of your files may be unfree. See Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2013 November 1#OTRS pending since June. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:17, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Vague Specification re Rejection of Article on Psychologist/AIDS Activist Walt Odets

Dear JSFarman:

You recently reviewed and rejected my submitted page on "Walt Odets." A previous reviewer rejected it on the basis of formatting issues, i.e., the size of the headings and my use of "Ibid." per Chicago Manual of Style citation formatting. He deemed the article/subject worthy of Wikipedia entry otherwise. The formatting issues were revised per that reviewer's suggestions and I resubmitted this heavily-researched article.

You then reviewed the article and rejected it on the following grounds:

"This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified."

I would very much appreciate it if you would be more specific, i.e., where you feel the article needs additional support with inline references, of which there are presently 33. Or is it that you do not consider the cited sources reliable? If so, which ones?

Please be more specific so that this significant article can finally reach the public.

With advance thanks, Beth Phillips sidonie7@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sidonie7 (talk • contribs) 03:27, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi Beth - my comment in declining the article was "The biographical information about Walt Odets needs to be supported with inline citations.: I was referring to the section "Early life," which has no inline citations. Walt Odets is absolutely notable. It's a great article! You just need to cite the information about his early life. (If you make any changes at all, you can put the article back through AfC - another reviewer might be fine with the article as it stands -- but if you add cites, hit me back, and I'll rereview it ASAP.) JSFarman (talk) 05:49, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

talkpage stalker swoops in to suggest.... Or, alternatively, since the bulk of the article qualifies for mainspace, the unsourced parts of the 'early life' section could be temporarily moved to the talkpage, pending further discussion of whether any of the info is either Challenged Or Likely To Be Challenged. As for the rest of the article, get it into mainspace, it sounds like the bulk of it has been ready for *that*, for some time now. HTH. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 15:09, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

AfC: Yassmin Ghandehari

Hi JSFarman, I'm a PR consultant at Bell Pottinger (see my user space for more info). I'm currently representing an Iranian-born interior designer named Yassmin Ghandehari, and have drafted an article about her which is in my sandbox (where it has been reviewed by User:Drm310 with a few resulting amends) as well as in AfC. I posted on COIN as well (since archived). If you could review this draft at some point and get back to me with feedback that would be hugely appreciated. Thanks very much indeed. GATalbot (talk) 11:26, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello GATalbot! I admire your forthrightness. Thanks for reaching out.

The article is well-written and neutral, but you haven't established notability. The coverage needs to be significant - the photo mention and the British Fashion Council articles don't work - and I don't see her mentioned in the Sotheby's piece or the UAL Development article. The PDF which you've linked may be valid, but since there's no identifying info as to the source, it's impossible to tell. Can you find more references? Please let me know if you have more questions, and again - thanks for your transparency. JSFarman (talk) 19:27, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi JSFarman, thanks very much for getting back to me. I'll look into the source of the PDF article, but I should point out that she is mentioned in the Sotheby's article:

"It was wonderful to see the mixture of high profile international art figures such as Jean Nouvel, Anish Kapoor, Frank Gehry, Ghada Amer, David Tang, Neil Macgregor, Richard Armstrong, Princess Ira Furstenberg, Comtesse de Beaumont, and Yasmine and Sasan Ghandehari (among others), mixing easily with the local dignitaries and social figures."

It's a different spelling of her first name but that's her and her husband. I take your point on the newsevents.arts.ac.uk article and I could remove that as it doesn't actually say anything about her role in the British Fashion Council. If I could identify the source of the PDF, and considering the Sotheby's mention, would that get us closer to establishing notability or do we need more? Thanks again. GATalbot (talk) 17:20, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello GATalbot, the distinction here is the difference between WP:NOTEWORTHY and the more stringent WP:N. Getting the *dedicated* article about Yassmin, requires significant coverage of *them* specifically, in multiple reliable sources. Passing mention proves they are Noteworthy, and thus can have their name mentioned in e.g. the interior design article, or more likely, List Of Noteworthy Interior Designers, or something like that. For significant coverage, there needs to be more than name-dropping in passing: you need some interview *about* Yassmin, or some review *of* their work specifically, or some reliable source that spends *several* sentences talking about them and their work. It's a fuzzy line, but I hope I've conveyed it to you as clearly as the inherent slippery-ness-of-the-slope permits. Feel free to ping my talkpage if you have further questions; I also recommend WP:TEAHOUSE for quick answers to most any WikiSubject. Hope this helps, good luck with your AfC, and thanks for improving wikipedia. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 15:17, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi there – okay, thanks for your help and advice guys. All the best. GATalbot (talk) 10:38, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Jessie Hill

Hi again

you were helping me last month when I was trying to create a page for my friend Jessie Hill. I have since revised it to include her as a Fashion Designer & Director and included more references. I think I only needed one more. Let me know what you think.

Lincoln O'Barry — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bayrockmedia (talk • contribs) 07:25, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Heya Lincoln - I just took a look at it and it still needs some work. I'll dig into it a bit over the weekend. Much closer though! JSFarman (talk) 04:01, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Articles for creation/Awkward Moment

Hi JSFarman, I saw your comment on the Awkward Moment submission about using more neutral language. I took your suggestion and refined problematic language. Is there anything else you would like me to do? Or is the article suitable for publication now?

Thanks,

Foreveryoung93 (talk) 17:47, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Nicely done, Foreveryoung93! I just moved the article into the main space. Thanks, Julie

AfC

Hello JSFarman, you looked at this back in August, when Notability was not established, saying that you could help with cleanup/formatting/wikiGnoming, if there were enough Reliable Sources. Are you still interested?

Seems to be borderline to me; falls into a grey area, easily satisfying WP:NOTEWORTHY, but perhaps not yet over WP:N for a dedicated article. Given the BLP's frustration with the process, methinks the *real* worry is that if we put it into mainspace, it will become one of the places that nobody active pays attention to, and slowly bitrot. However, that's not policy, the policy is just WP:N, which seems to be borderline-yes-and-borderline-maybe. Even if you don't have time for the copy-editing, can you give me a ping about where this BLP falls on the official-notability-spectrum^TM, please? Thanks. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 15:04, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello again 74.192.84.101 (talk). You're right - easily satisfies WP: NOTEWORTHY but falls just below the criteria for WP: N. Not enough significant/independent/reliable coverage. Valiant effort! (You, not Les Pendelton.) JSFarman (talk) 14:15, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Articles for Creation - Sam Carter (musician)

Thanks for your comments. I've cut out some of the "reviewerspeak" and tried to introduce a more neutral tone. Perhaps you'd care to take another look. As you yourself say elsewhere , "Oh my God, how can .... not have a Wikipedia page". Sam Carter is the only winner of the BBC Radio 2 "Horizon" award in the last ten years not to have one. He may have been a little quiet since 2010, but he's still garnering good notices and I think he deserves one.Giglister (talk) 17:07, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi Giglister. It's still not neutral (bold) and sometimes not encyclopedic (italic). It's also way too heavy on the reviews, which adds to the overall impression that the article is promotional.

'Sam Carter is a British guitarist, singer and songwriter, originally from the English Midlands but more recently based in east London[1], who has released two albums of mainly original material falling loosely into the folk/roots category. Winner of the "Horizon" award for best newcomer at the BBC Radio 2 Folk Awards in 2010, he is still widely regarded as having the potential to develop into a major talent in the British folk music world.[2] Highly regarded as an instrumentalist (contemporary Jon Boden of Bellowhead described him as 'the finest English-style finger-picking guitarist of his generation'[3][4], and former BBC Radio Two folk show presenter Mike Harding as "one of the most gifted acoustic guitarists of his generation"[5]), as a songwriter Carter marries a traditionally English narrative style with elements of American gospel and R & B in such a way as to cause some leading commentators of the folk and roots music scene to describe him as an "impressively original" performer[6]. After moving to London from his native Leicestershire, Carter came to the attention of British Indian musician Nitin Sawhney (who reportedly described him as having "a killer voice") and established singer/songwriter Martin Simpson (from whom, apparently, he received some guitar tuition), as a result of which he was installed as one of sixteen "Emerging Artists in Residence" at London's Southbank Centre in the autumn of 2008[7]. This in turn led to an invitation from fellow Artists in Residence Bellowhead to tour the U.K. with them in the Spring of 2009 and to ongoing collaborations with members of that group, both live and on record, particularly fiddle player Sam Sweeney. He released his debut album Keepsakes in August 2009 to generally positive reviews.[8]. Following his success at the BBC Radio 2 Folk Awards in February 2010[9], he was invited to participate in the British Council's "Shifting Sands" project, an ongoing creative project featuring musicians from the U.K. and the Arabian peninsula[10], and made a showcase appearance at the 2010 Cambridge Folk Festival. He released a second album, The No Testament, in August 2012[11] and made TV appearances on Later... with Jools Holland[12] and two BBC4 documentaries - one about the legendary folk singer Nic Jones, broadcast in September 2013[13], the other a recording of a tribute concert to the late singer/songwriter Sandy Denny, broadcast in November 2012.[14] Between the release dates of these two albums Carter spent some time in the United States, absorbing influences from American gospel and spiritual music, and the shapenote hymn-singing tradition of southern American vocal harmony music, all of which were reflected in some of the songs on The No Testament.[15] He has appeared twice at the annual Shrewsbury Folk Festival, in 2010 and 2013.[16] For festival appearances in the summer of 2013 and subsequent live dates in the autumn of the same year he formed a Trio with Matt Ridley (double bass) and Karl Penney (drums) and also played a handful of dates with Canadian folk singer Catherine MacLellan, with whom he had collaborated in 2012 on a transatlantic exchange visit organised and sponsored by the English Folk Dance & Song Society.[17][18] Another collaboration which resulted in a further TV appearance on the Andrew Marr Show on BBC1[19] involved Zimbabwean singer Lucky Moyo as part of Celebrating Sanctuary London 2013. Some commentators consider that Carter's guitar and vocal style is similar to that of noted British iconoclasts John Martyn[20] and Roy Harper[21], whilst the occasional bleakness and mordant wit of his lyrical perspective has further invited comparison with the work of Richard Thompson.[22]

It looks like you have the references to establish notability (although I didn't go through them carefully) - it's the tone that needs work. And now I'm going to go have a listen to Sam Carter - you've convinced me. :) Julie JSFarman (talk) 14:40, 14 November 2013 (UTC)