Talk:Clay Reynolds

Responses to Feedback after 2nd Decline

I summarize how I incorporated the feedback from approvers on the top of the main draft page. (Read that first). In addition, because some of the issues required a longer explanation/discussion, I discussed them on the talk page. Thanks. Robert J Nagle (talk) 20:33, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

MISUNDERSTANDING OF OFFICIAL WIKIPEDIA POLICY ON VERIFIABILITY AND SOURCING

The approvers who have examined this article and declined it so far have WRONGLY claimed that Wikipedia policy forbids the use of primary source in a biography of a living person. They have also wrongly claimed that Wikipedia policy forbids direct quotations. I shall explain why this submission complies fully with Wikipedia policy, but first, for comparison, you should look at the biography page for US author John Updike. The Updike wikipedia page is more than 20 years old and has been vetted numerous times.

The John Updike page contains 18 direct quotations from the author (the primary source and the subject of the article) in the Wikipedia article and about a dozen links to published articles and speeches by the author himself ). By contrast, the Clay Reynolds submission contains only 2 or 3 direct quotes from the author in the Wiki article and about a dozen links to published articles by the author himself.

Here is Wikipedia's official policy on verifiability and the use of primary sources:

Self-published and questionable sources may be used (my emphasis) as sources of information about themselves, usually in articles about themselves or their activities, ... so long as:

• Wiki official policy states that the material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim;
• it does not involve claims about third parties;
• it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the source;
• there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity; and
• the article is not based primarily on such sources.

(See the [| Official wikipedia policy on verifiability and the use of self published sources]

As you see, the John Updike article contained multiple quotations by Mr. Updike himself about his early life. For the Clay Reynolds submission, the quotes in the first two or three paragraphs relate specifically to early life growing up in Qanah TX that Mr. Reynolds would be the best position to know. These Reynolds quotations come from established publications that are not run or controlled by Mr. Reynolds. None of these quotations have made self-serving or exceptional claims, nor do they involve claims about third parties or events not directly related to the source. Therefore, official Wikipedia policy allows this kind of quote from a primary source to be made.

Furthermore, I have used primary quotes sparingly and only when a paraphrase would be inappropriate and/or awkward. I used a quote where Clay Reynolds talks about an early meeting with author Larry McMurtry who had influenced his writing. (McMurtry is probably the most notable author from Texas). The second quote comes from the Gale/enclopedia article and describes his motivation for writing Westerns. Given that 1)Reynolds is primarily a Western author and that 2)Reynolds has won several awards for writing Western fiction, including this quote is both relevant and compliant with Wikipedia's policy and guidelines. Robert J Nagle (talk) 20:30, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Notability and Prizes

Clay Reynolds has won several major regional literary awards and in 1994 won a very competitive National Endowment for the Arts Grant (a prestigious award in the USA). I provided citations for the more recent major awards; most recently, I have added a confirming link to Gale in Context: Biography reference guide (which is produced by Dictionary of Literary Biography published by Gale). Gale's biographical profiles are vetted and checked independently. Also, even though, Gale articles and resources are behind a paywall, I provided a URL to the same content on Enclopedia.com which has contracted with the educational publisher Cengage -- to provide public access to Gage resources. I have personally verified that the content behind the paywalled Gale In Context is identical to the article encyclopedia.com. In addition, many of these prizes are also mentioned on the subject's academic home page. Given that Reynolds has worked and taught at University of Texas at Dallas for more than 15 years and that the university has allowed these awards to be mentioned on the person's academic page for so many years without taking it down, that provides additional evidence supporting the claim that these awards were in fact legitimately received.Robert J Nagle (talk) 20:30, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Changes made to the draft before resubmitting late Aug 30

After talking to some wiki editors, I am revising the content to conform with wikipedia guidelines. I will be resubmitting later tonight. In response to the initial decline, the following corrections were made: First, another wikicontributor removed two long passages from the author for copyright reasons. Second, I removed about 90-95% of the direct quotations from the author Clay Reynolds. (There were still 2 or 3 quotes which were too brief to paraphrase and IMHO relevant to his bio). Third, I partially restored a reference to Texasbooklover.com (who is actually a nationally recognized critic) while reducing the length of the quote.Robert J Nagle (talk) 20:30, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Additionally, I cleaned up a few things and revised the links to the author's domain. (As luck would have it, it seems that the author is currently transitioning to a web domain.

Your misplaced comments on the draft include this " I devote a separate section in the Talk section to address Theroadislong's feedback about prizes and primary sources" Could you point me to this I don't see it here? The comment section is for reviewers. In addition Robert J Nagle you have not addressed any of the issues I commented on? Theroadislong (talk) 19:54, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Responses to 3rd decline

Thanks for your feedback (Sorry for the delay in responding because of the holidays I thought I had addressed the questions of primary sources/reliable sources as thoroughly as I can. I had even used official wikipedia policy to support my reasoning. It is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft_talk:Clay_Reynolds_(author)#MISUNDERSTANDING_OF_OFFICIAL_WIKIPEDIA_POLICY_ON_VERIFIABILITY_AND_SOURCING .

Also, I had pointed out a specific Wikipedia article (John Updike) that uses many of the techniques criticized by you. I'm just checking to make sure that you have read my statement and are familiar with the policy I am citing. It seems to me that you and the previous approvers are rejecting official wikipedia policy on the use of self-published sources or are just not aware of this policy.

Updike died a few years ago, and maybe different rules apply for that, but I have seen many examples of biographies of living persons citing statements by the wikipedia subject (for musicians, authors, intellectuals). To be fair, I have also seen examples of articles of living persons where there is no biographical section at all.

I have included mostly secondary sources about his works. They are mostly book reviews, but there are a few critical essays about the works of Reynolds and encyclopedia articles. But my usage of primary sources here is allowable under wiki policy, appropriate for the subject and not excessive.

After reading your comment, I slimmed down two parts on EARLY LIFE AND EDUCATION to make it more "neutral-sounding", but there's not more than can be done. The option you mentioned -- to remove the section on EARLY LIFE AND EDUCATION and just focus on published works -- is something I could live with, but it sounds unnecessary. I have already provided 11 secondary sources about Reynolds books.

As an aside, I've been a blogger for over 20 years and I can say authoritatively that this draft does not resemble a blog post in the slightest :) Specifically, I have removed any phrase which might suggest an editorial judgment of my own and even gone out of my way to locate overly critical book reviews. Instead I have merely described what these books are about and the typical topics found in his essays. Robert J Nagle (talk) 22:27, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Later Update: In response to DGG's question, I have said that there is no conflict of interest I need to declare other than 1)that Mr. Reynolds and I have a common friend on Facebook and 2)I'm doing an interview with the author for my blog (that indeed what caused me to notice that Reynolds has no wiki article. I have looked again over the article for possible puffery/PR speak, but in my opinion this article is pretty tight -- just a summary of book subjects. Wiki policy says that "Non-independent sources should never be used to support claims of notability, but can with caution be used to fill in noncontroversial details." I don't see anything in this draft article which conflicts with this policy. Robert J Nagle (talk) 07:25, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

RE: Potential conflict of interest

DGG suggested that there may be a conflict of interest between my publishing ventures and my writing the Clay Reynolds article. I wrote back here that I thought there was no conflict of interest and no need to make a declaration for this submission. To summarize: I have received no compensation of any kind for contributing this article and that I have no personal connection other than the fact that (1)we have a common Facebook friend and 2)I'm working on an in-depth interview with the subject and have emailed him several times for the interview while working on the Wikipedia article.

Robert J Nagle (talk) 06:32, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Death of Clay Reynolds

Just wanted to mention that Clay Reynolds died on April 14, 2022. It was officially announced in the Dallas Morning News on April 17 2022. I'm in the process of updating the page to reflect that fact. Robert J Nagle (talk) 15:31, 17 April 2022 (UTC)