Talk:Singularity Summit
Latest comment: 1 month ago by 2600:1000:B12B:AC8C:84F6:2CB7:DB36:CB82 in topic ?
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
References
editIt seems that there aren't many real references in this article and that all present ones should be moved to external links. Unless I'm missing something if there are no objections I will go ahead and move them in a few days. Theoretick (talk) 09:31, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
- I added two citations, should probably delete others. Theoretick (talk) 10:04, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
- Reference quality material is usually fully cited and put in "Further reading" to be used in future citations. The two references you added aren't adequate, they are primary sources affilated with the subject itself. The article needs to be sourced from third-party sources, such as those now in Further reading. If you remove the further reading, the subject will technically fail the general notability requirements (at least two reliable third-party sources that provide significant coverage of the subject). Then some deletionist will speedy it as spam. Yworo (talk) 15:13, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
- Ah, thank you, got it. In re-examining some of those "Further reading" links it would seem they are sufficient for at least establishing primary date of the conference. I'll remove primary source citations and reference those. Theoretick (talk) 19:45, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
- Great! It is of course OK is use some primary sources: for example non-controversial, non-self-serving material from the subject's website, provided that the majority of sources are third-party. Yworo (talk) 23:28, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
- Ah, thank you, got it. In re-examining some of those "Further reading" links it would seem they are sufficient for at least establishing primary date of the conference. I'll remove primary source citations and reference those. Theoretick (talk) 19:45, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
- Reference quality material is usually fully cited and put in "Further reading" to be used in future citations. The two references you added aren't adequate, they are primary sources affilated with the subject itself. The article needs to be sourced from third-party sources, such as those now in Further reading. If you remove the further reading, the subject will technically fail the general notability requirements (at least two reliable third-party sources that provide significant coverage of the subject). Then some deletionist will speedy it as spam. Yworo (talk) 15:13, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
?
editNo summits since 2012?
What happened at the summits?
Press coverage? Abstracts? 2600:1000:B12B:AC8C:84F6:2CB7:DB36:CB82 (talk) 16:18, 14 October 2024 (UTC)