User talk:Vanderwaalforces#Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Masini Situ-Kumbanga (2nd nomination)

Dcw2003 (talk)User dcw2003 requests:

Vanderwaalforces, do you think you could do a quick review of the new page Arthur Albiero? I could also use a review of Ray Daughters, which has been done for months with no editor looking at it. Do you know of anyone else who could do a quick review of either of these pages, tho I have a preference for Arthur Albiero first.

Thanks!!

dcw2003

Albiero is a swim coach, one of the 100 greatest Coaches of the Cenury and recently released to the Article pages. Ray Daughters was a Hall of Fame swim coach, but coached many years ago. There are few spelling errors or grammer errors for Arthur Albiero, and the review could be quick.

Thanks again

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Dcw2003 (talk • contribs)

:{{ping|Dcw2003}} Hi there, I will take a look when I have time. Happy editing. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 18:56, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

:Thank-you. Wish they were shorter pages. Dcw2003 (talk) 21:20, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

::@Dcw2003 BTW, I am getting about 60% copyright violating text from https://gocards.com/sports/swimming-and-diving/roster/coaches/arthur-albiero/2792, please try rewriting from Kenyon College down to Service to the swimming community sections. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:26, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

:::ok Dcw2003 (talk) 21:28, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

::::I've made another run through the sections you mentioned and made considerable changes. If I have to I'll start deleting, but 60% shows considerable change from the original. I think the content is important and should be well under 50% by now. I'll make another pass if you really want. Dcw2003 (talk) 21:46, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::Please do not take offense at this observation, it is just an input. Thank you for your service and careful reviewing.

:::::You might consider that the primary University of Louisville source document for the sections I rewrote is not a for profit publication but a Student online roster of one of their faculty member's and coach's accomplishments, as well as the accomplishments of many of their student athletes. As an educational institution, they rely on the income generated from people that come to their meets, and students who are impressed with their athletic programs and can be recruited. I believe the University would be pleased with the interest my article generates in the quality of Louisville's student athletics and faculty. No wikipedia article has been written for this coach, who deserves publicity for his accomplishments. I am a graduate of the University of Louisville myself, and believe there is a difference between a for profit publication which the source document is not, and a document that espouses the quality of a University's faculty, athletes and athletic programs. I have rewritten the sections you discussed twice, and will rewrite them with larger deletions if you request. Thanks again. dcw2003 Dcw2003 (talk) 22:40, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

::::::@Dcw2003 It makes sense now, thanks for writing and happy editing. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 08:22, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::You are more than welcome. Thank-you for your work and the time you spend editing. It is a painstaking and tedious job. Thanks again!! Dcw2003 (talk) 13:36, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

::::::::Hope you can complete your edit. Message me with any questions you may have. Dcw2003 (talk) 14:10, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::@Dcw2003 It is indeed a painstaking and tedious job, thank you too. I do not think I have an outstanding edit to make, I just did minor copyedits and that's all. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:20, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::Do you have to do something online to verify your edit is complete? Dcw2003 (talk) 14:45, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::@Dcw2003 No, I don't have to. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:47, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

::::::::I know I'm pushing my luck, but I've just uploaded another swim coach article, Charles Butt (swim coach) and if you're looking for more misery and bleary eyed torture, you can edit it as well.

::::::::Wasn't that an inviting invitation!!!

::::::::Thanks either way. Dcw2003 (talk) 15:05, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::@Dcw2003 This one is a fine article; I love love love fine article. Good job! Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:11, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Per your comment here, I just wanted to let you know that Ayobami Aranmolate Rasheed has been recreated as Rasheed Ayobami Aranmolate. I have checked the [https://www.wacscoac.org/downloads/fellows_list_original.xls list of fellows] on my phone but it’s too broad and I’m unable to reach my computer till some few days. So, you can check it out if it still piques you. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 17:39, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

:Ah, interesting, thanks for keeping me in the loop. He isn't a fellow, I had known, and now, I still cannot find him from the official list of fellows. I won't blame the NPPer, clearly the creation was deceptive. The author might as well be a sock of the creator of the former (who was blocked for being a sock too). Vanderwaalforces (talk) 20:36, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

:Oh, disregard the above. He happened to be listed in the "Original Fellows List" worksheet at number 5000. So, this looks okay. Although, it doesn't stop the creator from being a sock. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 20:40, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

::Alright. Nice work. Happy editing! Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 23:33, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:55, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

dcw2003 want to let you know: I know the weekend is over and you will have less time. But for what its worth...

I also recently completed and uploaded Clark Yeager (swim coach), a good detailed article if you have time to review it, or certainly if you prefer better to pass it along to someone else who might be interested in reviewing it, as I know you have been very busy. Thanks for all your kind words in your last few messages. Dcw2003 (talk)

:{{ping|Dcw2003}} Thank you for writing! I will check it out when I have time, you're doing a great job :) --Vanderwaalforces (talk) 22:11, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

:@Dcw2003 Hi there. I got to this today, I think it looks great, assuming good faith on the offline sources, since I do not have access to them. Great job! Vanderwaalforces (talk) 12:38, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

::The offline articles are newspapers which are a bit detailed. Thanks for your kind words, and hard work. I use a lot of newspapers having an online archive, but I might be better off reducing my level of detail such as quoting times from newspapers for swimmers. I do double check to verify my source information.

::Thanks again for your hard work!! Dcw2003 (talk) 15:47, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

:::Still unable to access Clark Yeager (swimmer) from outside wiki. Enjoy your edit, hes an interesting coach, and let me know when you complete your edit. I'm available for any questions. You must be a very thorough editor, and I must admit I always worry when my work is being edited. Thanks again for your hard work!!! Dcw2003 (talk) 15:56, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

::::I mean Clark Yeager, not Clark Yeager (swimmer) Dcw2003 (talk) 15:57, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::@Dcw2003 You did a good job too by coming up with that article, it is a detailed biography, and I love it. Thank you for your kind words too :) Vanderwaalforces (talk) 08:50, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:26, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi, Vanderwaalforces. I'm just posting to let you know that List of governors of Edo State – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for May 9. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008 (Talk) 00:31, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

The article Udagbedo you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold File:Symbol wait.svg. The article needs changes or clarifications to meet the good article criteria. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Udagbedo and Talk:Udagbedo/GA2 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 01:04, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

The article Udagbedo you nominated as a good article has failed File:Symbol oppose vote.svg; see Talk:Udagbedo for reasons why Talk:Udagbedo/GA2{{!}}the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 13:26, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

:duh, I guess I cannot take all articles to GA. Jens Lallensack, thank you for your feedback, nonetheless. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 13:27, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

::I understand that this is frustrating. If secondary/scholarly sources are really not available, the only way to get this to GA that I see is to provide the discussion on sources, and then use author attribution when you cite the primary source, as I explained in my closing note. You could ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject History if this would be a valid approach in this particular case, or if they have any other ideas, or if they think that this article cannot be a GA with this sourcing situation; I would be interested to read that discussion myself, too. Thanks, and all the best. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 14:00, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

:::@Jens Lallensack It is indeed frustrating, lmao. I just checked the WP History talk page you linked, it does not look like one that is actively participated in. This article is pretty short enough to not really be too stressful for me to fix, if you don't mind, can you please give an example of how the discussion of sources should be like encyclopaedically or not? Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:06, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

::::See Punic Wars, which is currently at FAC, as an example for a "primary sources" section. Since I'm not an historian, I wonder if {{u|UndercoverClassicist}} has an opinion here. UndercoverClassicist, if you have a moment to take a look at my closing note at Talk:Udagbedo/GA2, do you think it is, in principle, possible to bring this article to GA even when considering the absence of secondary sources, or is that impossible in this case? Thanks! --Jens Lallensack (talk) 14:33, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::Okay, I am anticipating UC's comment. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:53, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

::::::I think there's two separate issues here: pace Jens, I don't think A Short History of Benin is a primary source within the meaning of WP:PRIMARY, since it's a person writing about time periods long before his own, using primary sources (even if some of those were non-written) to do so. The primary sources in question would be the narratives Egharevba consulted to write his book. In principle, a book written by a person from Benin about Benin can be a secondary source, just as a history of Britain by a British historian can be perfectly secondary and reliable.

::::::However, as a separate issue, Jens has identified other issues of reliability in the source, particularly {{tq|the apparent mixing of facts with legends in that source}}, which means that an article which relies on it as evidence for material would fail GACR 2b. As Jens alludes, one way around this would be to cut through it and use the stories in it directly, treating them as primary sources, but we would then need to be able to cite reliable sources to show how scholars engage with these narratives.

::::::It's a bit of a difficult one: WP:DUEWEIGHT would be a showstopper at FAC or ACR, because to meet that, you have to be able to show that the balance of material in the article reflects the balance of relevant material in secondary sources, but DUEWEIGHT isn't part of the GA criteria. There's perhaps a more fundamental problem here the notability standards: if a subject simply hasn't been written about in secondary sources, it probably shouldn't have a stand-alone article in the first place. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 17:23, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::Thanks, UC, that is interesting and I fully agree with your thoughts. I just looked around if I can find more sources – and I did: For example, there is this article in German [https://www.jstor.org/stable/40460800] which has a paragraph about Udagbedo, and also provides alternative spellings that maybe can lead to new sources if searched for: Udagbedo (Udagbedo = Olagbeno). So I wouldn't be worried about notability; sufficient sources seem to exist.

:::::::Still, A Short History of Benin would probably remain the main source, and it seems to be the most important source for Benin studies. Therefore, there are some papers discussing that very source (e.g., those cited in the Wikipedia article on the book) – those could perhaps form the basis of a "Sources" section.

:::::::So yes, considering UC's comments and all, I would suggest to 1) do a deep dive into the literature, trying to get hold of as many sources as possible; 2) write a paragraph about the main source A Short History of Benin, focusing on its reliability and how historians use and interpret it; and 3) use author attribution whenever you cite that book, so that those statements do not come across as universally accepted facts. That should be sufficient to reach GA level. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 18:55, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::Thanks UC, I just wanted to hear this from someone else. Like I said in the nomination page, @Jens Lallensack, the books are from reliable authors that people (not just me or Wikipedia) rely on for historical facts about the Benin Kingdom, especially Egharevba’s kingship work which is highly cited by fellow historians. I do not think that looks like a source that is unusable on Wikipedia, especially since I have already been citing it in other GAs I’ve written relating to the Benin Kingdom. I think the issue of “facts” and “legends” mixup can easily be fixed though, do you think you can undo your closure of the nomination while we fix that?

:::::::UC, thank you for your comments, I do not think notability is anywhere near the problems this article is facing; a King of Benin Kingdom is definitely presumptively notable, by all means the same way a King of England is, or at least, by virtue of their position, at least by popular OUTCOMES particularly WP:MONARCH, and with this, they do not have to meet the requirements for WP:GNG.

:::::::Over all, I think we were both thinking the same way regarding the source. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 18:57, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

::::::::I can't undo it (because the GAN system is complex and involves a bot), but I am happy to review if you re-nominate it after implementing the steps I pointed out above. I see that the book is important, but that does not necessarily mean that it is reliable for Wikipedia's purposes and we need to use it very carefully (also since reviews did criticize its accuracy); I therefore still think that the mentioned steps are absolutely necessary. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 22:07, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi, I translated the Tokyolite article from the Indonesian Wikipedia as a part of blue-ing wikilinks on pop kreatif (in short: the Indonesian version of city pop), in preparation for pop kreatif GA nom. Recently, the Tokyolite article was marked as non-notable; I've removed self-published and user-generated sources, and focused more on citing online articles from the Indonesian National Radio (Radio Republik Indonesia) website, as well as the Indonesian music news website Pophariini. These articles cover the band's releases, and I believe they fulfill "multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble" criteria on WP:MUSICBIO. Do you think the revisions are sufficient for notability measures? D (talk?) 04:58, 26 April 2025 (UTC)