Talk:Jay Gallentine

{{WikiProject banner shell |class=C |blp=yes |listas=Gallentine, Jay |1=

{{WikiProject Articles for creation |ts=20250416233923 |reviewer=Cabrils |oldid=1285980090}}

}}

{{Connected contributor|User1=DavidHitt|U1-declared=yes|U1-otherlinks=Gallentine and I are both authors published by the University of Nebraska Press. As such we are peers, but I have no financial relationship with Gallentine and had no preexisting personal relationship prior to sharing a publisher.}}

Comments left by AfC reviewers

{{AFC comment|1=Well done on creating the draft, and it may potentially meet the relevant requirements (including WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO, WP:AUTHOR) but presently it is not clear that it does.

As other reviewers have noted, Wikipedia's basic requirement for entry is that the subject is notable. Essentially subjects are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published {{strong|secondary sources}} that are {{strong|reliable}}, intellectually independent of each other, and {{strong|independent of the subject}}. To properly create such a draft page, please see the articles ‘Your First Article’, ‘Referencing for Beginners’ and ‘Easier Referencing for Beginners’.

The image used may breach copyright, which Wikipedia takes seriously, so should be removed unless clear evidence of its legal use is provided. If it is indeed the draft's author's "Own work" then the author clearly knows the subject and has a conflict of interest that must be declared (see details below).

Also, if you have any connection to the subject, including being the subject (see WP:AUTOBIO) or being paid, you have a conflict of interest that you must declare on your Talk page (to see instructions on how to do this please click the link).

Please familiarise yourself with these pages before amending the draft. If you feel you can meet these requirements, then please make the necessary amendments before resubmitting the page. It would help our volunteer reviewers by identifying, on the draft's talk page, the WP:THREE best sources that establish notability of the subject.

It would also be helpful if you could please identify with specificity, exactly which criteria you believe the page meets (eg "I think the page now meets WP:AUTHOR criteria #3, because XXXXX").

Once you have implemented these suggestions, you may also wish to leave a note for me on my talk page and I would be happy to reassess. Cabrils (talk) 22:04, 2 April 2025 (UTC)}}

{{AFC comment|1=Thanks for the work done on this draft, I have made some edits that you may undo if you're not happy with them. I will leave it to another editor to review. Flat Out (talk) 23:28, 10 February 2025 (UTC)}}

{{AFC comment|1=The key issue is that there is not enough written about the subject by independent sources. Please see WP:AUTHOR and reliable sources.

Feel free to engage on my talk page, best wishes Flat Out (talk) 22:32, 17 December 2024 (UTC)}}