Talk:Toronto Clarion
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Untitled
editDraft talk:Toronto Clarion
Full disclosure of possible conflict of interest: I'm the person who started writing this article. I was a volunteer writer and I sold advertising for the Clarion. Nonetheless the legacy of the Clarion and its interconnectedness with all other leftist activities in Toronto during that era make the Clarion's history a notable topic and an overdue article. Anne9853 (talk) 10:55, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
How many names to include?
editIn real life, I have been asked to include more names in the section listing writers and other contributors. The wish may be for the article to name people who were actually more central to the history of the Clarion than perhaps those listed.
Given that hundreds of people volunteered at the Clarion, and given its collectivist or cooperative nature, the wish may also be to avoid excluding people, for to elevate a few names only seems contrary to the Clarion's actual history or philosophy of inclusivity.
However, my beginner-level understanding is that Wikipedia is a dictionary, having its own manual of style, and that listing many unverifiable (i.e., not yet in a published edited book or a Wikipedia page) names would be contrary to Wikipedia's functionality and style.
A senior Wikipedia editor, reviewing the draft article, remarked approvingly that the people listed have their own Wikipedia pages, and are therefore Notable in Wikipedia terms. (This is a significant part of establishing that the Toronto Clarion article itself is notable and therefore worthy of publication.) She suggested with a :-) that if people listed did not have Wikipedia pages, I might like to write pages for them. Anne9853 (talk) 10:15, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
QED - Another editor removed reference links for CUP, Paul W., Ulli D., and Karolyn K. presumably because they were to external sites and not Wikipedia. That is due to the manual of style for Wikipedia. Nonetheless, I have restored Paul's; let's see what happens. If all is quiet, at some point I will restore the links for the other folks. Anne9853 (talk) 13:57, 21 May 2021 (UTC)