Talk:Pleasant DeSpain

.

Pre AFC acceptance discussions

Pre AFC acceptance discussions

Request for assistance Dear Any Wiki Pros from a Wiki novice... I created a page a year ago for a living author. I didn't hear that its submission had been rejected until about a week ago for these reasons: 1) This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources. 2) This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies. I have removed some of the statements that cannot be verified via the internet. I have removed bios/post from the author's publisher's web page. And I have changed the reference to the National Storytelling information to mirror others accepted references on another Wiki page. Someone, please give me some advice as to what else I should alter. Perhaps it's this quote [...refers to DeSpain as “a pioneer of the American renaissance in storytelling.”] Or perhaps reference to the author being awarded [“Seattle’s Resident Storyteller” by the city’s mayor.] The award was in 1975. The other quote from probably the same era. Pleasant has been around "forever". I'd rather not submit this again until I get a bit of specific guidance on what should be changed. If anyone would help, I will be eternally grateful! Sincerely, Ben Ben Airdunat (talk) 02:44, 23 July 2020 (UTC) I placed this analysis of this version's referencing as a comment on the draft, and reproduce it here: Source assessment table: Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG? https://www.storytellingcenter.net Mentions the association, but not the subject of the article Primary source Unmentioned ✘ No https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jimmy_Neil_Smith&oldid=889498518 Is about another person Wikipedia articles may not be references WP:CIRCULAR, an WP is not a reliable source WP:CIRCULAR (and removed by another reviewer) ✘ No https://www.motherearthnews.com/nature-and-environment/national-association-for-the-preservation-and-perpetuation-of-storytelling-zmaz85zsie Not mentioned. It is the association's reference, not the gentleman's ~ Does to spring to mind as a reliable source Unmentioned ✘ No http://www.reginaress.com/articles/the-storytelling-revival-in-the-united-states ? 404 error 404 error ✘ No DeSpain, Pleasant (May 31, 1980). "Old One-eye, a folktale". The Seattle Times. As far as I can judge form the reference, this is authored by the gentleman The Seattle Times. is a reliable source Self authored pieces have no significnce ✘ No DeSpain, Pleasant (December 8, 1979). "Godfather Death, A Russian Tale". The Seattle Times. As far as I can judge form the reference, this is authored by the gentleman The Seattle Times. is a reliable source Self authored pieces have no significnce ✘ No http://www.rambles.net/despain_sweetland.html A review of some of the gemtleman's body of work ? I think this is likely to be reliable A review by a probable RS of the gentleman's work ? Unknown This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}. It follows that the referencing must be attended to in order to verify notability. Fiddle Faddle 07:29, 23 July 2020 (UTC)