Connie Krauth
Your submission at Articles for creation: Louis A. Del Monte (February 16)
edit
Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Louis A. Del Monte.
- To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the .
contributions to Wikipedia!
- Please remember to link to the submission!
- You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.
Your submission at Articles for creation: Louis A. Del Monte (March 1)
edit Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Louis A. Del Monte.
- To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the .
contributions to Wikipedia!
- Please remember to link to the submission!
- You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.
Your submission at Articles for creation: Louis A. Del Monte (April 5)
edit Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Louis A. Del Monte.
- To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the .
contributions to Wikipedia!
- Please remember to link to the submission!
- You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.
Your submission at Articles for creation: Draft:Louis A. Del Monte (August 6)
edit - If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Louis A. Del Monte and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
- You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.
del Monte
editI see you are continuing to work on the Del Monte article. As you are an the PR person TMA E Marketing, you have a significant WP:COI with the subject. Please read the linked policy for help on editing when you have a conflict of interest.
I notice your request for help on Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2014_February_17#Review_of_Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation.2FLouis_A._Del_Monte
A few brief answers.
- The number of required references to show notability is not absolute. If the new york times writes a major article bibliographical article, or a major publishing house puts out an in depth biography, or 60 minutes does a special on him, that could be enough to show notability. On the other hand, hundreds of press releases, youtube videos, or local newspaper mentions may not be enough. In the end, notability will be determined by WP:CONSENSUS of involved editors, using WP:N as our policy for evaluation. In general self published works, or any work written by the subject himself, etc are not signs of notability. Notability is WP:NOTINHERITED so even if his book or company may be notable (which I do not comment on either way) it would not necessarily translate to the person himself.
- Referencing the school as a whole is not enough, and the actual credentials would run into WP:BLPPRIMARY. Best is if that data can be WP:Verified in 3rd party WP:RS. However, some level of basic detail may sometimes be included without references if its not an extraordinary claim. However, if someone disputes or challenges that claim it will need to be cited to a reliable source. IF the school has published on their website that he was involved with him, that can be used for non-extraordinary claims, but it must be WP:Verifiable by the reader.
- Self references are sometimes valid, but only in limited circumstances. see WP:SPS and WP:SELFPUB
- A resume style naming of employers is not a valid citation, again it would need to come from 3rd party sourcing. As with the school data, if the school or business themselves have published that he was involved with them, that can be used for uncontroversial and non-extraordinary claims.
However, be aware that in general resume style data is inappropriate for wikipedia WP:NORESUMES WP:NOTPROMOTION.
Also, please see WP:PSEUDO and WP:BLP for general guidance on BLPs. for further insign into the WP:Notability requirements see some potentially applicable BLP notability guidelines such as WP:NACADEMICS WP:AUTHOR WP:BIO
Unfortunately, based on the type of references you are currently using in your draft, I think it is unlikely that you are going to get an article that survives our processes. Del Monte is just not notable enough at this time (in my opinion). Google news has 0 hits for him. His books are not widely cited or referenced by others. His "award winning" status are from his employer and not of significant note themselves. See the various notability standards I mentioned before for examples WP:NACADEMICS WP:AUTHOR WP:BIO
If you have further questions you may reply here, or on my talk page. Gaijin42 (talk) 20:00, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello Gaijin42, Thank you for the clarification. Although I no longer work at TMA E-Marketing (left in 2010) I do help Mr. Del Monte with administrative tasks from time to time which I understand is a conflict of interest. I was hoping to streamline the article to focus on his books, but now understand the references are too local and/or narrow of a focus to qualify. I found the notability information too ambiguous and vast to clearly understand. Are there any other options for the article? Could I post it in the talk page and hope that over time someone else could complete it if relevant references would be available? Thanks.Connie Krauth (talk) 20:21, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
- Since del Monte self published the books, and they have not received any significant critical commentary from major book reviewers (major newspapers, notable critics, etc) any article that focuses on his books is going to have sourcing problems. You can leave the draft article where it is, and if sourcing becomes available in the future, someone could pick it up and enhance it. (But know that after 6 months, the article is subject to being deleted as an "abandoned draft" Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#G13._Abandoned_Articles_for_creation_submissions - on the other hand it may sit around forever if nobody notices it.) - The best thing would be to have someone just write an article from scratch when proper sourcing is available. That ensures that the article follows the proper WP:WEIGHT based on the information that is actually in the reliable source, and not a WP:COATRACK of one or two sourced items, followed by a resume that isn't well sourced. I realize this probably isn't what you want to hear, and that you may be dissapointed by the loss of effort you have put into the article. I do sympathize with that situation. Gaijin42 (talk) 20:29, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
- If one were to want to write an article focusing on Mr del Monte as an author, the relevant criteria would be WP:AUTHOR. Criteria #3 & #4 is the mostly obvious way to satisfy the criteria
- 3 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.
- 4 The person's work (or works) either (a) has become a significant monument, (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums. Gaijin42 (talk) 20:32, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
MfD nomination of Draft:Louis A. Del Monte
editDraft:Louis A. Del Monte, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Louis A. Del Monte and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Draft:Louis A. Del Monte during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. DGG ( talk ) 04:19, 12 February 2015 (UTC)