Talk:Peter Petrigno

Third-party sourcing maintenance template

I’ve re-placed the maintenance template because we need additional independent reliable sources. Looking at our current sources:

1. Primary source
2. Routine coverage / user generated
3. Self-published
4. Obituary for father
5. Brief quote from 1986
6. Award / Primary source / Not independent
7. Routine coverage
8. Passing mention of Petrigno

So there is a need for independent sources that discuss Petrigno in depth. POLITANVM ^talk 23:18, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Does this count as a primary source: https://patch.com/new-hampshire/milford-nh/peter-petrigno-milford-state-representative-candidate ThePorgieBaggins98 (talk) 21:05, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, most people consider interviews to be primary when they’re talking about themselves. WP:INTERVIEW explains the rationale behind it. POLITANVM ^talk 21:14, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

@ThePorgieBaggins98, I’m not following how the biographical details on Petrigno’s would be considered independent/third-party as described in your edit summary. That biography section was likely written by Petrigno himself, and even if it isn’t, that page isn’t independent of him since he almost certainly has editorial control over the biography.

And even if it were, the point in the maintenance template still stands. We need multiple reliable, independent, third-party sources, and to reduce the excessive dependence on sources too closely associated with Petrigno. That hasn’t been addressed.

I’ll try to do some cleanup, but it would be best to find some additional sources, preferably from independent news organizations. I haven’t found any helpful articles on Google News so far, but I’ll try to keep looking. POLITANVM ^talk 15:16, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

@Politanvm, the link I gave in the description is owned by the NH state government. Thank you for your help.

Here are more links I found: https://www.nashuatelegraph.com/news/local-news/2018/11/08/democrat-blue-wave-drenches-nashua/

https://www.concordmonitor.com/New-Hampshire-Secretary-of-State-s-office-oversees-recount-effort-21606181

https://www.milford.nh.gov/about-milford-nh/pages/elected-officials

https://www.nhhousedemcaucus.com/team/rep-peter-petrigno

https://news.yahoo.com/milford-nh-2020-general-election-200926207.html

https://nhaflcio.org/congratulations-to-our-2020-afl-cio-endorsed-candidates-for-the-nh-house/

https://www.edies.org/previous-years-winners/2000-winners/

https://manchesterinklink.com/open-letter-from-nhs-top-teachers-to-commissioner-edelblut-gov-sununu-let-our-teachers-stay-home/ ThePorgieBaggins98 (talk) 15:57, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, I’ll take a look through these. But NH government sources aren’t independent of Petrigno, since it’s his employer. And regardless of who publishes the source, if the content is written by Petrigno or an employee it isn’t independent or secondary. It’s fine for voting record and basic biographical details, but most of the article should be sourced to independent secondary sources. POLITANVM ^talk 16:37, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Having taken a look through these, I don’t see much here to improve the article. Most of this is routine coverage of elections, and is just Petrigno’s name within a list of many people. Or it’s another self-written biography/CV on the NH House Dem Caucus.

Are there any actual articles written about him? If not, it isn’t even clear that he meets WP:NBIO/WP:POLITICIAN, though I don’t see much value in proposing this article for deletion. POLITANVM ^talk 17:08, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. I am a new wikipedia editor, still trying to learn the ins and outs of wikipedia. I appreciate your help. I wasn't expecting this article to as much scrutiny as it did because dozens of NH State Reps and NH state senators have similar pages with far less sources (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:RoundSquare#New_Hampshire_Rep_Project) ThePorgieBaggins98 (talk) 17:21, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Sure thing - it’s impossible to keep track of all the policies and guidelines. This article just happened to come to my attention while I was watching recent changes. I’m a bit skeptical that all of those other articles meet WP:NBIO, but I also don’t think it’s worth investing much time in deleting stubs that aren’t overly promotional or controversial. Nominating articles for deletion based on lack of notability can be difficult because you need to show not just that the article doesn’t currently have sufficient sourcing, but also that no such sources exist.

I’m going to leave the tag on this page for now, and keep an eye out for other sourcing to improve it. POLITANVM ^talk 01:14, 13 August 2021 (UTC)