| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Feedback from New Page Review process
editI left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Good start
North8000 (talk) 02:05, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
Reply
editIt seems that this comment "there's something very odd about it, like statements made with references part way, but goes on about something that's not in the source. It has this appearance of starting with what they want to write about, and trying to "find sources" around the desired contents." was written by you. I do not understand what you mean by it. Do you want references to be all at the end of a paragraph? This is why you think that there are "part way"? What do you mean by "find sources". Could you give me specific example of what is very odd, please. Puncinus (talk) 00:26, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Puncinus:, This is moved from my talk page, because it's about an article. Not having any loose-ends would be ideal. Editors put things into Wikipedia that can not be verified in sources all the time even though they're not supposed to do it. When there's no inline citation on the end, it makes it extremely difficult to verify the claim. Anything stated must be directly verifiable, per WP:V. However, note that everything verifiable doesn't guarantee inclusion. Sources like things authored by the subject should be used very sparingly. YouTube, vimeo, TikTok and such are largely unacceptable as sources. Editors should be locating sources first, then put in their own words what's said in the source. Although you can't take separate sources and make up a new conclusion not supported by the sources directly. Graywalls (talk) 00:34, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Could you be more specific about this particular article. I asked for specific example of "very odd" references. What is you objecting to - the style of citation, placement of the citation? What is "no inline citation on the end"? Puncinus (talk) 00:09, 21 August 2024 (UTC)