Talk:Roger Steinmann

Self-published sources, need help

Vexations has checked and added the banner. I'd be happy, if you, Vexations, or someone else can help me with this. Is it the

• the facts Roger Steinmann writes about himself on his own page,
• the news-paper clips and documents he has posted or
• both of it?

I’ve seen Self-published sources, but to be honest, I’ve focused more on the second part Using the subject as a self-published source: "There are living persons who publish material about themselves, such as through press releases or personal websites. Such material may be used..."

Bullet 1.-4. looks fine to me. Is it 5.? Or is it other things?

What can I do to fix this? Can you please help?

Thanks, Ogcgn (talk) 06:42, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

See Vexations (talk): I have tried to address many self-published topics:

• "Life" stripped: "Childhood" removed and "First films" and "First successes" merged into "First steps"
• TV Broadcast of "Die Türe" and interview with Markus Imhoof removed
• Progressing film ambitions: Steinmann kept himself active... removed
• Theater activity 1986 slightly changed and reference 1 (self-published) replaced by 3rd party reference
• Project: Metalbeast 3rd party reference added
• "Illusion Infinity": IMDb reference on casting director and 3 3rd party references on plot added, e.g. Standfort.edu library
• "Ladies First": is currently developed in Hollywood removed - self-published
• Other activities stripped: 4 self-published claims removed
• Filmography: table aligned to IMDb Filmography, self-published films removed, self-published references replaced by IMDb reference and some 3rd party reference added
• Theater stripped: self-published titles removed
• Unproduced screenplays (selection): 9 self-published titels w/o 3rd party references removed

Ogcgn (talk) 23:33, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

I have removed about a dozen or so primary sources hosted by the article subject's site. The short answer to what kind of sources are good is this: we do not generally consider things the article subject says on their own (or publishes on their website themselves) to be reliable sources. These things are called primary sources. We do consider things that people have independently published about the subject, in good publications, to be reliabale sources. This is because someone has done some amount of fact-checking before publishing it.

@Ogcgn:, I wonder also if you might tell us if you have some relation or connection to Arthur Steinmann, as your edits are only about him?ThatMontrealIP (talk) 00:17, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

ThatMontrealIP, thanks for your help. To answer your question: no relation to him. He's living in Thailand, I'm living in Germany... Just met him very briefly, found that he's a remarkable guy and as I'm an IT guy and frequent consumer of Wikipedia I wanted to find out, how Wikipedia is working internally. I just used this person (you call it subject) for a start... I read that Wikipedia is happy to get more contributors, so I tried to produce something... So far anybody I've interacted with was very supportive and helped me. Actually it looks more difficult than I have expected (my mistakes and my open questions might show you that I not pretend anything). To be honest, your question makes me thinking whether my decision to try to contribute was the right one?! Maybe the subject was, however I prefer a challenge over a trivial matter. If there's any doubt left, please let me know, I don't want to waste your and my time. Ogcgn (talk) 01:20, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Advice: avoid adding sources published on the web site of Rober Steinman. Edit some other articles. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 02:04, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Ogcgn, I still count 37 unique references to Roger Steinmann's own website. The only page that has any usable material is http://www.roger-steinmann.com/newspaperclips.html. Those should be referenced as in this example:

<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.roger-steinmann.com/images/710_2007-07-12_about_RS_CAREER,_Hoengger-1.JPG|title=Amateurfilme sind wichtige Zeitdokumente|last=Sidler|first=Sarah|date=12 July 2007|work=Höngger|access-date=17 January 2020|url-status=live}}</ref>

which renders as

References

Now, that particular example is itself problematic, because it quotes Max Hänsli as saying: "Roger Steinmann beispielsweise gehört jetzt and der Westküste Amerikas zu den bekanntesten Regisseuren." (English: "Roger Steinmann, for example, is now one of the best-known directors on the west coast of America." If that were true, we'd have plenty of material, as we do with say Spielberg, Scorcese, Hitchcock and Kubrick, arguably "the best-known directors on the west coast of America". We wouldn't have to rely on hyperbole from a regional newspaper like the Unabhängige Quartierzeitung von Zürich-Höngg. Vexations (talk) 13:08, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

ThatMontrealIP, Vexations, thanks, currently a bit busy in real live, I'll try to fix more this weekend. Ogcgn (talk) 16:52, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Poster Markus 220919.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)