| Submission declined on 22 November 2023 by Theroadislong (talk). This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Where to get help
How to improve a draft
You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article. Improving your odds of a speedy review To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags. Editor resources
|  |
| Submission declined on 22 November 2023 by WikiOriginal-9 (talk). This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia. | |
| Submission declined on 17 November 2023 by WikiOriginal-9 (talk). This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia. | |
| Submission declined on 14 November 2023 by WikiOriginal-9 (talk). This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia. | |
| Submission declined on 14 November 2023 by Timtrent (talk). This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia. "with the public[19][20][21][22][23][24]." is a prime example of WP:CITEKILL. Instead we need one excellent reference per fact asserted. If you are sure it is beneficial, two, and at an absolute maximum, three. A fact you assert, once verified in a reliable source, is verified. More is gilding the lily. Please choose the very best in each case of multiple referencing for a single point and either drop or repurpose the remainder
. "Matti has two papers and a profile listed on Google Scholar[28][29][30]. " Google Scholar is a specialised search engine. Unsuitable as a reference It all contributes to the WP:BOMBARD present all through this draft. Thin the references out. No reviewer is going check them all, so your referencing militates against a useful review. I get that you are keen on this being accepted. To achieve this you need a dramatic set of cuts. Cut text that adds no value, cut references that add no value. | |
| Submission declined on 5 November 2023 by LEvalyn (talk). This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia. | |
| Submission declined on 8 October 2023 by Johannes Maximilian (talk). This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources. Please check your references and remove the external links from the body. | |
| Submission declined on 3 October 2023 by Hey man im josh (talk). This submission seems to be a test edit and not an article worthy of an encyclopedia. Please use the sandbox for any editing tests, but do not submit for review until you have an article that you want reviewed for inclusion in Wikipedia. Thank you. | |
| Submission declined on 2 October 2023 by Jamiebuba (talk). This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia. | |
| Submission declined on 2 August 2023 by Theroadislong (talk). This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia. | |
Comment: Wikipedia subjects need in-depth coverage (full-length articles, not just passing mentions) in usually at least 3 reliable sources that are not written by or affiliated with the subject. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 17:16, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
- Comment: The infobox states their birthdate is June 7, while the first sentence states their birthdate is July 6. Which is correct? GoingBatty (talk) 17:52, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
- Comment: Oh, regarding the Toronto mayoral run, see WP:NPOL: candidates for election are not presumed notable, and in fact mayors are not presumed notable (though if Charlton had won the mayoral election, Toronto's mayor probably is notable.) Minor coverage of a mayoral candidate is likely to be considered WP:ROUTINE, especially when all candidates are given an equal platform. ~ L 🌸 (talk) 17:54, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
- Comment: The very large number of sources now show verifiability of information but not yet notability of the subject. Music reviews are the best sources about Charlton rather than by Charlton, but these all appear to be blogs, which cannot support notability because they are user-generated content. Similar coverage in a magazine or newspaper (one with an editorial board) would support notability. "Books about Matti Charlton on Google Books" also don't support notability since it's obvious that they are probably by Charlton (not "Donaldo Trumpetti"). Being collected in libraries/archives or writing for newspapers is not clear evidence of notability. See WP:NAUTHOR: a notable author should have several books that pass WP:NBOOK. My advice to the editor here is to focus on quality over quantity and look for 2-3 sources that are independent and secondary. ~ L 🌸 (talk) 17:48, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Matti Charlton | |
|---|---|
 Charlton in 2012 | |
| Born | July 6, 1980 |
| Other names | Madison Matti Charlton |
| Occupations |
|
| Musical career | |
| Genres |
|
| Instruments |
|
| Labels | |
| Website | matticharlton |
Madison Matti Charlton (born July 6, 1980), known professionally as Matti Charlton, is a Canadian music producer, publisher and author.[citation needed] They identify as transgender and are politically active in 2SLGBTQIA+ rights demonstrations in Toronto.[citation needed]
In 1997, they released their first poetry chapbook, "the burning of lake simcoe."[1]
Charlton brought social changes to the culture of the University of Toronto's Engineering Student Union (SKULE).[2]
Charlton was the creative director of The Telephasic Workshop, an art studio on Yonge street which had 3D printing services early in the market at the time.[3]
Charlton was interviewed by the Telemundo Costa Central news channel in Santa Barbara, California during the Earth Day festival in 2024.[4]
References edit
- ^ McLennon, Rob (November 1997). "Cut and Paste". Word: Toronto's Literary Calendar.
Review of Matthew Charlton's poetry chapbook The Burning of Lake Simcoe.
- ^ Cooney, Darren (c. 2005). "Strangers in a Strange Land". Xtra!. On the Scene.
- ^ Bellini, Paul (July 6, 2011). "Telephasers on Stun". fab. p. 22.
- ^ Lehr, Tracy (April 28, 2024). "Santa Barbara Earth Day honors Plastic Free Future Co-Founder Alejandra Warren with Environmental Hero Award".