Talk:Ioan Dimăncescu

COI issues

This article was authored by the grandson of the subject of the article (see [1]), thus making it a clear case of wp:COI; It's a very informative and well-formatted article, with plenty of sources - but they are offline and thus cannot be verified so it fails wp:V. According to the article the person received multiple awards so it may meet our notability guideline but I couldn't find reliable sources that can prove the accurateness of facts. I nominated the article for deletion but withdrew it after 2 days. Thanks for reviewing. Maashatra11 (talk) 18:35, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

• Point of information: I do not comment on the COI question, but I believe one statement in the RfC intro to be incorrect: "plenty of sources - but they are offline and thus cannot be verified so it fails WP:V". Please see WP:V#Access_to_sources, which states, "The principle of verifiability implies nothing about ease of access to sources", giving examples, "some online sources may require payment, while some print sources may be available only in university libraries." PL290 (talk) 19:23, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
  • You're right, but I think that an article that is ENTIRELY based on unverifiable sources is not valid though I may be wrong about the verifibability here. Anyway the WP:V issue not the only problem here I think. Notability is not clearly established though I can see that there are claims he's received some awards but the article lacks sources (even offline ones) that can support this claim. Maashatra11 (talk) 20:08, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
    • The article's author (Ioan's grandson) has added some online sources, but I couldn't find anything in these sources that is also in the article. Seems like WP:OR to me, but it's obvious given the assertion that the subject is the author's grandfather.Maashatra11 (talk) 20:49, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

• Author feedback: Hello everybody, I would like to make some comments:

I presented Ioan Dem. Dimancescu’s biography from a neutral point of view based on the refferences list mainly:
-published books mentioning his presence/contribution: 1, 3
-online versions of published books: 2, 14 (recently inserted) (please serch for the indicated page at referrences)
-published press articles from the ’20-’40 years (scanned/copied and placed on the external link 2): 4-13
Other sources (not mentioned as article references, but primary, too) are verifiable documents from reliable sources: official notes, military documents, ID cards, diplomas, nominal decorations/medals/brevets etc. (all scanned/copied and placed on external link 2)

The external links are placed for the following reasons:
-to offer free access to a copyrighted collection (2) and
-to extensively present (for whom concerned) facts briefly mentioned in the article (1)
None of the external links has commercial purposes.

The article has no mentions of special physical/mental attitudes, war braving etc. about the subject or family related aspects (personal life, hobbies etc.). E.g. a simple mention (no additional comments) of his wound in WWI/Basarabia is backed by an official form of a war hospital + diagnostic not included as references, but placed on link 2

I think that even I am close related to the article subject I edited carefully, from a NPOV. I’ve tried to identify possible biases but I can’t find them. I strongly consider that the article is just a sum of facts with no COI.

About notability of this article I’ve already written on the nominated for the deletion talk.

My single purpose is to offer to Wikipedia English readers a source of information about a Romanian citizen enough notable. I think that if Romanian editors didn’t react on the article (RO version) up to now it’s a fact that I came up with valuable information for the Wikipedia project from a local/Romanian perspective.
I need support, including specific terminology argumentation from Wikipedia senior editors that trust in my good intentions/contribution for the project!
Please also advice me if someone (even if senior wiki editor) could cut content (e.g. succession box) with no warning/explanation, even if this is quite relevant for WPN.
Alin Dimancescu (talk) 21:03, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Request for Comment Section

Being the grandson of the subject does not disqualify anyone from editing here. Wiki COI policy says individuals with connections to the subject should edit with caution. So any editor that maintains a netural POV can edit here. That said, an article talk page is for discussion of the article content only. It is not the place for discussion of editor behavior such as COI. I suggest you take this discussion to a formal resolution venue such as the Administrators Noticeboard [2] or the Conflict of Interest Noticeboard [3]-- — Keithbob • Talk • 16:11, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi. I tried the COIN but no one came up to help... And no one really addressed my concerns in AfD. That's why I thought a RfC would be appropriate. I don't think opening a case in ANI is the right thing to do for this issue. I'd simply like to know if you and other users think this article qualifies as valid for Wikipedia. Thanks,Maashatra11 (talk) 16:40, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Why, I see that the RfC actually helped; I can see you make substantial edits to the article in order to make it encyclopedic. Now the question is if the subjet itself qualifies and is notable. I haven't received a clear outside opinion of that yet. Maashatra11 (talk) 16:46, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Correct, notability and reliable sourcing is still an issue. See my comments below and thanks for your help in improving the article. I have this article on my watchlist now. I think if the three of us work together we can move the situation forward and avoid the notice boards. But that's up to you. I look forward to working together.-- — Keithbob • Talk • 16:55, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

I would be very happy to help. I generally help when I have good grounds to work on but sadly, I have no access to these sources... And the "online" sources the author has given were not in the citation given. When I made a google search I found zero third party sources. I wonder what is the next step to be taken. Maashatra11 (talk) 17:04, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

General Comment on the Article

I have gone through the article and reorganized it and upgraded the language, prose and grammar. I have also removed some instances of promotional, off topic and non-encyclopedic text. What's left to be done in my opinion is to review the sources and make sure that the info presented is accurate and that the sources are considered to be reliable by Wiki standards and thereby determine that the subject is notable. I will come back another day and help with that.-- — Keithbob • Talk • 16:52, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for that. But the notability question hasn't been settled yet. Maashatra11 (talk) 16:54, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Correct it may not be notable. We have to check the sources and see. I have no opinion either way until then.-- — Keithbob • Talk • 16:56, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Cheers for your help... though I'm not sure you'll be able to check them. We'll see... Maashatra11 (talk)

Hello everybody, please let me help you on verifiability with an example. The following link pointed to a pdf scan of the original offline item. In the original text (now it’s slightly changed) it should supports the idea that Dimancescu “promote and organize winter sports”

I know that the article is in Romanian, but you can see the title of the magazine (it’s the official issue of the National Board of Physical Education), date (Jan 1924) the author (Ioan Dem. Dimancescu), the military grade (locotenent), the organization he represented (National Institute of Physical Education), even his own documentation sources at the end of the article. The title is “Mountain as physical and moral refreshment/recharging pretext” (Muntele ca factor de intarire fizica si morala). The whole article is about the benefits of practicing walk out (plimbare), winter sports and mountain climbing (alpinism) and the tone of the article is a call to action one. In a single word is about promotion (of the winter sports).

Having no experience in wiki practical issues I am asking you how far should we go with the verifiability? I know that I am trying to contribute to an English version of wikipedia (the main one), but this means to scan all the articles and translate them? Because I can't force Google to find non “zero” results and English versions on events happened more than 70-90 years ago in Romania.

WP-N is re-opened for each time even it is supposed to be surpassed at the deletion proposal phase (keep verdict). The same with the COI verdict based on my assumed family connection (but this means not necessary COI) doubled by repeated refferal of my close connection as COI and WP-OR argumentation.

I think that Dimancescu is enough notable on many domains: career/awards, scouts contribution, sports contribution (even he is not an Olympic winner, he should be considered from a local perspective: no performance in sports up to WW1 and army was forced to rebuild the sports movement from the basis), president of a Romanian sport Federation, president and founder of a Royal sport Club (Peles Sinaia). For all the above, he's included in Romanian Sports Enciclopedia at personalities section.

And finally, there is a point to make him more than notable and luckily the article is online, in English and the source is very honorable (being US): A swords fight starring Dimancescu! I “fight” too, not for him as person, but for his profile (a good Romanian) admission! All the best, Alin Dimancescu (talk) 22:41, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi and thanks for your discussion of sources. The URL for the PDF you have provided will not work on Google Translate so I cannot see what the article says about the Subject. From a glance I'm not too impressed as it appears it might an article published by an association and not a newspaper. Also Dimanscescu does not appear to be a significant subject in the article. Secondly, the Time magazine source you provide is a copy of an editorial letter sent in by a member of the public. This would not qualify in Wiki as a reliable source. Do you have any other sources? We do have a source for his participation in the Inter Allied Games. [4] In the meantime I'm going to add some tags to the article. -- — Keithbob • Talk • 19:50, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Alin, since other editors cannot translate the Romanian sources, could you please translate the relevant sections of each source as the pertain to each bit of text in this article and place those English sentences in the inline citations per WP:RSUE] which says:

• Because this is the English Wikipedia, English-language sources should be used in preference to non-English ones, except where no English source of equal quality can be found that contains the relevant material. When quoting a source in a different language, provide both the original-language quotation and an English translation, in the text or in a footnote. Translations published by reliable sources are preferred over translations by Wikipedians. When citing a source in a different language, without quotations, the original and its translation should be provided if requested by other editors: this can be added to a footnote, or to the talk page if too long for a footnote. If posting original source material, editors should be careful not to violate copyright; see the fair-use guideline.

Does this make sense, what I am asking? Thank you. -- — Keithbob • Talk • 20:07, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Hello Keithbob, I tried to structure the sources I have on the subject and the results are placed on one of the external link Collection of Documents and News Articles. I translated the titles and I marked the ones I used in references with red bold.

Apart the already 2 sources available online (Inter-Allied Games and Romanian Radio Biography), the rest of them are available offline only, but could partially be checked on online catalogues:

-The Springfield Republican returns “found” for “Students From 20 Foreign Nations Answer College Roll Call” in Limit by date=1925 and a submission is required further

- Nicu Alexe’s Physical Education and Sports in Romania - Encyclopedia is available on Romanian public libraries (e.g. Commercial Academy Library in Bucharest)

Probably most of the Romanian sources are available in Romanian public libraries (Gazeta Sporturilor collection, Dimineata collection, Realitatea Ilustrata collection etc.) but they are not present on online library indexes.

I wonder if I go ahead with the sources translation (relevant pharagraphs as you say), this will make sense if I am not a reliable source of translation? Thanks, Alin Dimancescu (talk) 21:39, 7 August 2010 (UTC)