User:Cassiopeia/NPPS/FormalDude

Hello, welcome to your New Page Patrol School page! Every person I instruct will have their own page on which I will give them support and tasks for them to complete. Please make sure you have this page added to your watchlist. Your NPP School page has been specifically designed according to you and what you have requested instruction in - for that reason, please be as specific as possible when under my instruction, so that I know the best ways to help you (and do not be afraid to let me know if you think something isn't working).

Make sure you read through Wikipedia:Notability as that's the knowledge which most of the questions I ask you and tasks you do will revolve around.

How to use this page

This page will be built up over your time in the Academy, with new sections being added as you complete old ones. Each section will end with a task, written in bold type - this might just ask a question, or it might require you to go and do something. You can answer a question by typing the answer below the task; if you have to do something, you will need to provide diffs to demonstrate that you have completed the task. Some sections will have more than one task, sometimes additional tasks may be added to a section as you complete them. Please always sign your responses to tasks as you would on a talk page.

If both the instructor and student make completing the course curriculum a top priority, it will generally take around a month to go through the entirety of the curriculum. This pace is not required or necessarily expected, but rather is provided in order to give participants an idea of what to expect.

Notability

PART 1

When patrolling or reviewing an article, you may often come across articles do not meet the WP:N guidelines, but the editors make the edits in good faith. Please read WP:AGF and do not WP:BITE the new editors.

A. Notability is a test guidelines to decide whether a given topic warrants its own article in Wikipedia mainspace. Please read Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, General Notability Guidelines, Specific Notability Guidelines, Stand-alone list before completing the following tasks.

General notability guidelines

1. In your own words, why it is important to WP:AGF and not WP:BITE new editors.

Answer: Assuming good faith is a vital policy of Wikipedia that plays right into one of Wikipedia's five main pillars: treat each Wikipedian with respect and civility. AGF is an important part of civility specifically when it comes to new editors because they are not familiar with Wikipedia and have more honest reasons to make mistakes. Jumping on newcomers and making threats or appearing aggressive deters new people from contributing to the Encyclopedia. When dealing with new editors it is important to contextualizing their experience with their actions in order to react in the best possible manner that encourages them to contribute constructively to Wikipedia.

Y. Good. When possible, we could send a personal message to explained the problem in hand and provide the Wikipedia guidelines links for the editor so they would understand the applications of the guidelines. Cassiopeia talk 03:06, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

2. In your own words, how is notability defined in Wikipedia?

Answer: Notability is a series Wikipedia guidelines that considers whether the subject of an article is "worthy of notice". This is determined largely through verifiability–are there reliable, independent, and significant sources about the article? If so, it is that can help establish notability. For example, is the source trustworthy? Is it affiliated with the subject? Does it cover substantial detail about the topic? These are all things that need to be considered when evaluating if sources indicate notability of an article. Additionally, the article must make claims that indicate the subject of the article is worthy of note–an article cannot be notable if it has no indications of notability.

Y. In Wikipedia, notability means "worthy to be noted" - it is defined as a topic is "presumably" notable for stand-alone article or list if (1) it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent from the subject where by the sources talk "directly" about the subject in depth and in length and not only passing mentioned and (2) it is not excluded under the What WP:Wikipedia is not policy. Cassiopeia talk 03:06, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

3. Does a step by step instructions on how to "Change a car tire" considered a notable topic in Wikipedia?

Answer: Maybe, but it doesn't matter. WP:NOT is a policy that overrides the WP:Notability guidelines, and it says Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought, nor is it an instruction manual. So even if it was notable, Wikipedia articles are not permitted to read like a "how-to" style manual.

If we must evaluate its notability: both "tire" and "car" are notable topics, but step by step instructions on how to change a car tire is probably not a notable topic for Wikipedia. Any instruction guide on changing a car tire is bound to have original research. It is a proposed solution that will vary depending on who you ask, and is likely to include personal feelings/opinions, which do not belong on Wikipedia.

Y. Well-done. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a how to manual site. Cassiopeia talk 03:06, 10 August 2021 (UTC

4. What are the differences between A WP:GNG and a specific notability guidelines? how do we determine which one to use when patrolling an article?

Answer: WP:GNG is applicable to all topics on Wikipedia, while a subject-specific notability guideline to a certain topic-area. Both are used to help determine the notability of a topic. If either WP:GNG criteria or a subject-specific notability criteria is met, the article may be presumed notable.

You can determine which one to use when patrolling an article by checking both WP:GNG criteria and the applicable subject-specific criteria. If it meets either one, that is the one that can be used to support the notability of the article.

Y. Right. Note: SNG (specific notability guidelines) and SSG (Sport specific guidelines) do not override - this means that if a sport person fails certain SNG but for other reason do have enough IRS (intendent, reliable sources) to support the subject, then the subject would considered passing Wikipedia GNG guidelines. GNG Example: certain subjects would not meet GNG due to the fact that no article talk about them directly in length and in depth such the academics- WP:PROF - who would received few or none independence source talk about them (we would see BBC write an article about car stuck in a tree see here but not the President of Australian National University would be hard to find. Other SGN such as WP:NPOL and WP:NASTROspecify a very strict set of source criteria and requirements respectively. Many times when a subject fails GNG and the article is nominated for AfD (Article for deletion) but pass SSN/SGN with verifiable sources, the article would usually closed as a keep. Cassiopeia talk 03:06, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Specific notability guidelines

5. If an editor creates an article about "2024 Summer Olympics" in 2019 without providing any sources, is the subject considered not notable and why?

Answer: No, it would not be considered notable because per WP:Notability (events), "all articles about anticipated events must be verifiable." Not having any sources means it is not verifiable.

Y However, Olympics host country would be selected 8 years prior the event date, so sources could be found easily in the internet. For a reveiwer or even an editor, if we know about the subject well and know there are IRS out there could be found, (sources can be in any languages as long as they are IRS), then as a good practice we search for the sources (inline citation) and add them in the article so they could pass the GNG/SSG/SNG. Cassiopeia talk 03:06, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

B. Without considered of sources/content policies and review just based on "subject specific notability" (SSN) "alone" for sake of the exercises below, please answer if the subject meets the SSN guidelines, based on the given content below, and specify under (1) which notability criteria they meet or fail (example - MUSICBI#1 if certain sub set of criteria is applicable) and (2) reasons/explanations.

6. A New York city based 2021 start up software company , specializing in data mining, has just received a USD 200K investor fund.

@Cassiopeia: I'm not sure how to answer this one without considering sources because the subject specific criteria WP:Notability (organizations and companies) is based on elements of the article sourcing. ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲 talk 03:18, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude If you read (B) info above, the questions from 6 to 10 are based on no sourcing but just based on the info providing by the questions. In assingment 2 is all about sourcing and there will be some exericese with sourced content. The answer for questions 6-10 can be found on SSG and SNG (sport specific notability and Specific notability guidelines - all you have to do is to read the specific SSG/SNG info). Hope this help. Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

@Cassiopeia: So my answer would be WP:Notability (organizations and companies) states that a company is notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject, but I don't know how to answer whether is passes/fails that criteria without assessing sources. Is WP:Notability (organizations and companies) not the correct SNG? ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲 talk 03:49, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude, This section of the assignment is purposely designed not look at the sources (because there is no sources provided) but just look at the SNG/SSN criteria to gauge if the subject mentioned pass the notability guidelines. Cassiopeia talk 03:57, 8 August 2021 (UTC

Answer: This company may meet some of the SSN. According to Wikipedia:Notability_(organizations_and_companies):

Some commercial organizations meet Wikipedia notability guidelines but care must be taken in determining whether they are truly notable and whether the article is an attempt to use Wikipedia for free advertising. Wikipedia editors should not create articles on commercial organizations for the purpose of overtly or covertly advertising a company. Please see WP:NOTADVERTISING.

N. For a start up company, normally it would not pass find SSN or GNG but is created for promotion. Cassiopeia talk 03:06, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

7. Tagir Ulanbekov who is a Ultimate Fighting Championships fighters with the undefeated mixed martial arts record of 10-1.

Answer: Tagir Ulanbekov does not meet the SSN. Per WP:MMABIO

Criteria supporting notability

1. Have fought at least three (3) professional fights for a top-tier MMA organization, such as the UFC (see WP:MMATIER); or
2. Have fought for the highest title of a top-tier MMA organization; or
3. Been ranked in the world top 10 in their division by either Sherdog (Sherdog.com) or Fight Matrix (FightMatrix.com).

This fighter does not meet criteria 1 as they have only fought for one top-tier MMA organization (The UFC). This fighter does not meet criteria 2 or 3 either according to the Sherdog source.

Y Well-done!. Cassiopeia talk 03:06, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

8. A upcoming action drama title "Suleiman the Great" based on the the life of Suleiman the Magnificent, was reported will be in production in December 2021 and to be released on August 2022 in the cinemas.

Answer: No, does not meet the SSN. Per WP:NFF, films that have not been confirmed by reliable sources to have commenced principal photography should not have their own articles, as budget issues, scripting issues and casting issues can interfere with a project well ahead of its intended filming date. The film in question is said to not begin production until December 2021.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 03:06, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

9. A political candidates, without any previous or current political position, who is running for November 2021 election for a Senator position in United States with multiple local newspapers coverage of his candidacy.

Answer: Meets some SSN. Per WP:POLITICIAN, criteria #1 is not met, as they do not and have never held political office. Criteria #2, however, "Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage" is possibly met depending on the significance of coverage from the multiple local newspapers.

Y. Almost all politician do received local coverage during the campaign period. That would not could count as part of WP:NPOL guidelines, unless the coverage is something else of the subject besides the political campaign. We would accept the article f the subject has "won" the election but yet to assume the office. Cassiopeia talk 03:06, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

10. A singer who self produced his first album in May 2020 and his songs are listed in Spotify.

Answer: Likely does not meet any WP:SINGER criteria. Justification:
Criteria #1: Not enough info to determine but highly unlikely as this is a difficult feat.
Criteria #2: Not enough info to determine but highly unlikely as this is a difficult feat.
Criteria #3: Not enough info to determine but highly unlikely as this is a difficult feat.
Criteria #4: Not enough info to determine but highly unlikely as this is a difficult feat.
Criteria #5: No, self-produced.
Criteria #6: No, self-produced.
Criteria #7: Not enough info to determine but highly unlikely as this is a difficult feat.
Criteria #8: Not enough info to determine but highly unlikely as this is a difficult feat.
Criteria #9: Not enough info to determine but highly unlikely as this is a difficult feat.
Criteria #10: Not enough info to determine but highly unlikely as this is a difficult feat.
Criteria #11: Not enough info to determine but highly unlikely as this is a difficult feat.
Criteria #12: Not enough info to determine but highly unlikely as this is a difficult feat.

Y. Subject fails every WP:SINGER notability guidelines. Cassiopeia talk 03:06, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

C. Based on which SSN guidelines the below subjects are notable under (1) which notability criteriaMUSICBI#1 (if certain sub set of criteria is applicable) and (2) reasons/explanations

11. Carlos Alós-Ferrer

Answer: Notable under WP:NACADEMIC. Reason: meets criteria #8.

Y Being a professor does not meet WP:NPROF criteria 5. However the subject meets WP:NPROF #1 - see [1] for being highly cited and #8 as the chief editor of Journal of Economic Psychology [2]. We often use scholar google citation to gauge the notability of the scholars since there are just too few IRS in any newspapers about them. Cassiopeia talk 03:06, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

12. Alistair Overeem

Answer: Notable under WP:NMMA. Reason: meets criteria #1 and #2.

Y - Meets both WP:NMMA and WP:NKICK for criteria 1 & 2. He is also one of only two fighters to hold world titles in both MMA and K-1 kickboxing at the same time. Cassiopeia talk 03:06, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

13. Jennifer Lopez

Answer: Notable under WP:SINGER. Reason: meets a multitude of criteria. Also notable under WP:ENTERTAINER.

Y The subject is notable (1) under SINGER#1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #8, #11, #12 and (2) NACTOR#1, #2, #3. Pls list the "specific" criteria next time in your answers. Cassiopeia talk 03:06, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

14. Three Mile Island accident

Answer: Notable under WP:EVENTCRIT. Reason: meets criteria #1 and #2.

Y. The subject is notable under EVENTCRIT#1 and 2 and the event had a lasting effect on the history. Cassiopeia talk 03:06, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

15. Persepolis

Answer: As a world heritage site, it is notable under WP:GEOFEAT. "Artificial geographical features that are officially assigned the status of cultural heritage or national heritage, or of any other protected status on a national level and for which verifiable information beyond simple statistics is available, are presumed to be notable."

Y. Cassiopeia talk 03:06, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

---

Communication

FormalDude, Good day. See assignment 1 above.

(1) For all the assignments, pls provide hist diffs of the articles, reverts, edits, reports, results of the reports, talk page messages that are applicable.

(2) Pls provide guidelines where applicable and justify/explain in details of your application or analysis.

(3) Pls ping me if you need assistance (here in this program page at the communication section of every assignment).

(4) Please book mark this page and ping me when you have finished the assignment for me to review.

(5) If you need to take a break from editing Wikipedia for more than 2 weeks, pls inform me so I may know. If you Stay safe and best. Welcome to NPPS. Cassiopeiatalk 00:46, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm looking forward to learning from you. ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲 talk 01:48, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

@Cassiopeia: Completed. (Will notify you here moving forward). ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲 talk 01:44, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude, Well-done. See comment above and let me know if you have any questions or you are ready to move on to the next assignmennt. Cassiopeia talk 03:06, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, @Cassiopeia, that is some exceptional feedback. I don't think I have any questions right now, I'll let you know if any come up though. Ready for the next one! ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲 talk 06:47, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude, Pls read my comment again on question Assignment #6, as the initial of I marked it wrongly. I have since correct it. Thank you. Cassiopeia talk 10:01, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, I see where I was wrong. ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲 talk 06:38, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

---

Sources

Background for trainees

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia for such content claimed should be supported by independent (secondary), reliable sources for verification. Please read WP:RS, WP:IS, WP:RSP, WP:V, WP:PROVEIT, WP:Primary, WP:Secondary, and WP:Tertiary and answered the the below questions in your own words.

You could contact WP:RX if you could not find the sources yourself either on web due to Paywall content or printed books.

---

Exercises

1.

Topic	Explanation	5 Examples	Comment by Cass
Reliable source	Sources used in Wikipedia should have been published. Some published documents are written by just one person, and nobody else checks it before it is published. These sources can contain mistakes or untrue information that people have not checked. The most reliable sources reflect the most common views on a subject, and have been checked by others before being published. These are called reliable sources. Of course, a lot of other aspects go in to determining the reliability of source; it is important to look at the piece of work itself, the creator of the work, and the publisher of the work in detail for a full picture.	(example)The Guardian newspaper The New York Times newspaper Washington post newspaper BBC News news organization NPR News news organization	Y. Reliable sources are those that are published, are known for fact-checking and accuracy and are independent of the subject of the article. In reliability the context matters - the age of the source, it's author and publisher all influence the reliability. See Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources for supplement to the reliable sources guideline. Cassiopeia talk 01:35, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
User generated sources	User-generated sources are any form of content that has been posted by users on online platforms such as social media and wikis. These are not considered reliable because they are not typically reviewed in any manner for factual accuracy. Some exceptions occur, for example when the content can act as a Wikipedia:Primary sources for a notable person.	Quora social platform Twitter social media Blogger (service) blogs TikTok video-based social media Reddit forum-based social media	Y. Cassiopeia talk 01:35, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
Non Independent source	An independent source is one that has no vested interest in a particular Wikipedia topic and is thus expected to be able to cover it objectively.	Deseret News not independent of the LDS Church. Washington Post not independent of Jeff Bezos. The Straits Times not independent of the government of Singapore. Fox News not independent of Rupert Merdoch. Arab News not independent of theSaudi Arabian government.	Y. I think you mean "Non independent source is one that.... instead of An independent source..." Non independent source is the one that is in any way affiliated/connected/associated (including COI, marketing, press releases, interview, official websites of the subject or associated com/individuals and etc.) with the subject of an article. Cassiopeia talk 01:35, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

---

2.

Type	Explanation	Sources (15 Primary ; 5 Secondary ; 5 Tertiary)	Comment by Cass
Primary	Sources very close to an event, usually involved in one way or another, and therefore my have a COI.	(example) scientific journal articles reporting experimental research results Meriwether Lewis was a primary source for the Lewis and Clark Expedition Roger Stokoe Goodell is a primary source for the NFL MLK was a primary source for the "I have a dream" speach Senate Intelligence Committee Report is a primary source for the U.S. Senate. George Washington's journal is a primary source on George Washington. Eminem's lyrical notes are a primary source on Eminem's music. Video footage of Michael Jackson is a primary source for Michael Jackson. Corresponding Blackbox Flight Data Recorder is a primary source for plane wrecks. Anne Frank's diary was a primary source for the holocaust. Oprah's interview with Prince Harry and Megan Markle was a primary source on the Royal Family. Ninety-five Theses by Martin Luther was a primary source on Martin Luther's religious philosophy. Phaedo by Plato is a primary source on Socrates. The WHO report on COVID-19 is as primary source for scientific study of COVID-19. OJ Simpson's autobiography is a primary source on OJ Simpson.	Y. Good work. Primary sources also include Diary, Memoirs, Letters, Autobiography, Research paper , A work of art, Novel (by the author), Film (by the film director), Personal webpage, Press release, Photographs, Video and audio recordings, Autobiographies, Government documents (Declaration of Independence), Scrapbooks, Artifacts, Interviews, Speeches, Poems, Songs, Case studies, Manuscripts etc.
Secondary	Sources that are at least one step removed from an event.	(example) newspaper Chemistry textbook that analyzes the history of chemistry. CNN Political commentary on current events. Washington Post news article about President Biden. Biography of Obama by David Garrow.	Y. Secondary sources also include A book about a topic Documentaries, Book or Flim Reviews, Scientific journals (analyzing already existing data) and etc. Cassiopeia talk 01:35, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
Tertiary	Third-party sources that are typically summaries of secondary sources.	(example) encyclopedias Wikipedia Twitter News The World Almanac AtlasObscura.com	Y. Dictionaries, Textbooks and etc. Cassiopeia talk 01:35, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

---

3.

Subject	Primary	Secondary	Tertiary	Comment by Cass
Example: Art	Example:Sculpture	Example:Article critiquing the sculpture	Example:Encyclopedic article on the sculptor
History	Anne Frank's diary	Article reporting the discovery of Anne Frank's diary	Anne Frank Museum	Y. Cassiopeia talk 01:35, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
Science	WHO COVID-19 origin report.	Peer reviewed journal analyzing the WHO COVID-19 origin report	Twitter News articles about Peer reviewed journals analyzing the WHO COVID-19 origin report	Y. Cassiopeia talk 01:35, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
Athletes	OJ Simpson autobiography book	New article about OJ Simpson's autobiography book	Wikipedia article for OJ Simpson's autobiography book	Y. Cassiopeia talk 01:35, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

---

4. Please explain in your own words why the content claimed needs to be verified?

Answer:

One of Wikipedia's main missions is to be a trustworthy encyclopedia. Editors should reference credible sources so that their content can be easily verified, as this is the cornerstone to becoming a trustworthy resource.

5.Could we used Wikipedia as the source? and why?

Answer: No. Wikipedia is a tertiary source, meaning it provided information from other sources. It does not make sense to cite a source to a source citing organization. You would need to cite what Wikipedia cites if you wanted to "use Wikipedia as the source."

Y. Wikipedia can NOT be the sourc- see WP:CIRCULAR. Cassiopeia talk 01:35, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

6.Give an example and explain why a source is reliable but not independent of a subject?

Answer: Deseret News is a source that has editorial independence from its owner, the LDS Chruch. It has a history of being generally reliable, so it is considered reliable, but it is not independent of the subject of the LDS Church, because it is owned by them.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 01:35, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

7.Give an example and explain why a source is independent source but not reliable?

Answer: This is a grotesque example, but shows very clearly why independence does NOT make a source reliable. InfoWars is independent of the subject of the Sandy Hook massacre, the two subjects have little if anything in common, however, InfoWars is a completely unreliable source for the Sandy Hook massacre because they have demonstrably written false and unverified conspiracies about it and other topics.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 01:35, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

---

Pls indicate "y" for yes or "n" for no or "?" after "ind", "rel" and "sig" (see first example) and give a brief explanation of why you place "y" or "n".

8.

David Petraeus

David Howell Petraeus AO (/pɪˈtreɪ.əs/; born November 7, 1952) is a retired United States Army general and public official. He served as Director of the Central Intelligence Agency from September 6, 2011, until his resignation on November 9, 2012 after his affair with Paula Broadwell was reported.

Petraeus was born in Cornwall-on-Hudson, New York, the son of Sixtus Petraeus (1915–2008), a sea captain from Franeker, Netherlands.

In 2003, Petraeus commanded the 101st Airborne Division in the fall of Baghdad

Source assessment table:

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/11/09/david-petraeus-cia-resign-nbc/1695271/	via USA Today news team	news not opinion	About his resignation	✔ Yes
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2011/09/06/petraeus-sworn-into-cia.cnn?iref=allsearch	broken link	" "	" "	✘ No
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/david-petraeus-paula-broadwell_n_2118893	via HuffPost news	news not opinion	Scope is about Petraeus	✔ Yes
https://www.geni.com/people/Sixtus-Petraeus/6000000015418360012	via Geni.com	Geni.com is a genealogy site that is considered generally unreliable because it is an open wiki, which is a type of self-published source. Primary source documents from Geni.com may be usable under WP:BLPPRIMARY to support reliable secondary sources, but avoid interpreting them with original research.	It is a profile of Petraeus's alledged father.	✘ No
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2010/05/petraeus-exclusive-201005	via Vanity Fair news team	Vanity Fair generally reliable	Scope is about Petraeus	✔ Yes
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/beyond/interviews/petraeus.html	primary source: interview	PBS	Interview with Petraeus	✘ No
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/david-petraeus-general-surge-401740.html	via The Independent news team	The Independent, a British newspaper, is considered a reliable source for non-specialist information	It is essentially a biography of Petraeus.	✔ Yes
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}}.

References

Y. We usually will take digital/press source. (The cnn video source was a dead link above - the source can be viewed here.

(1). For video especially in Utube, We need to look where the info is reported. If it is reported by news channel such as cnn, bbc etc then that would be considered reliable, independent sources. Not all news channel are considered reliable for some of them are funded/own (fully or partly) by the local governments such as RT and Aljazeera. If the info is reported by some utubers (which most of the utube info are from) then that would be considered not independent and reliable.

(2). Huffpost - Although HuffPost contributors is considered NOT reliable in WP:RSP but if we look closely, the piece is written by By ANNE FLAHERTY, KIMBERLY DOZIER AND ADAM GOLDMAN, THE ASSOCIATED PRESS. The Associated press is considered reliable source as they sell their news to other news agencies. However, the content is based on many individual opinions, for such I would talk it as not reliable sources. Cassiopeia talk 01:35, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

9. Please answer if the subject meets the "subject specific notability" guidelines, Which subject specific notability based on the given content above, and specify under (1) which notability criteria they meet or fail (example - MUSICBI#1 if certain sub set of criteria is applicable) and (2) reasons/explanations.

Answer: Yes. Notability (people)#Politicians and Judges. Meets both criteria as he has held office and is a major political figure who has received significant press coverage.

N Having a position in CIA is not a politician role. However, he meets (1) WP:MILPEOPLE #4 and 5 because (2) he played an important part in the War in Afghanistan (2001–present) and because he was the commander of the International Security Assistance Force and meet GNG. Cassiopeia talk 01:35, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

---

10.

Martina Hingis is a Swiss former professional tennis player. She won five Grand Slam singles titles. Hingis was one of the highest-paid female athletes in 2000. She retired in November 2007 after being hampered by a hip injury for several months and testing positive for a metabolite of cocaine during that year's Wimbledon Championships, which led to a two-year suspension from the sport.

Source assessment table:

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.instagram.com/martinahingis80/	affiliated with subject	self-published	about the subject	✘ No
https://www.latimes.com/sports/more/la-sp-us-open-hingis-20170910-story.html	secondary source	consensus of reliability	about the subject	✔ Yes
	secondary source	consensus of reliability	not about the subject	✘ No
https://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/id/21171438/tennis-another-twist-bizarre-career-martina-hingis	secondary source	consensus of reliability	about the subject	✔ Yes
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2007/nov/01/tennis	secondary source	consensus of reliability	about the subject	✔ Yes
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}}.

References

Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:01, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

11. Please answer if the subject meets the "subject specific notability" guidelines, Which subject specific notability based on the given content above, and specify under (1) which notability criteria they meet or fail (example - MUSICBI#1 if certain sub set of criteria is applicable) and (2) reasons/explanations.

Answer: Yes, meets all 6 WP:NTENNIS criteria.

Y. Full content from the article Martina Hingis would pass all the WP:NTENNIS criteria. Cassiopeia talk 01:35, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

---

Pls indicate "y" for yes or "n" or "?" for no after "ind", "rel" and "sig" (see first example) and give a brief explanation of why you place "y" or "n".

12.

Fallingwater, Mill Run, Pennsylvania (1937)

Frank Lloyd Wright (June 8, 1867 – April 9, 1959) was an American architect, interior designer, writer, and educator. Wright believed in designing structures that were in harmony with humanity and its environment, a philosophy he called organic architecture. His creative period spanned more than 70 years. He works includes The Guggenheim, swirling, snail-shaped museum in the middle of Manhattan. Fallingwater, which has been called "the best all-time work of American architecture." This is one of Wright's most famous private residences (completed 1937), was built for Mr. and Mrs. Edgar J. Kaufmann, Sr., at Mill Run, Pennsylvania. Constructed over a 30-foot waterfall, it was designed according to Wright's desire to place the occupants close to the natural surroundings. The house was intended to be more of a family getaway, rather than a live-in home.

Source assessment table:

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://nypost.com/2017/06/07/frank-lloyd-wright-was-a-house-builder-and-homewrecker/	secondary source	NY Post is generally considered unreliable	About the subject	✘ No
https://franklloydwright.org/work/	primary source	too closely affiliated with the subject	about the subject	✘ No
https://web.archive.org/web/20080302053743/http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/jul2004/nf20040728_3153_db078.htm	secondary source	Business Week is probably reliable	about the subject	✔ Yes
https://books.google.com/books?id=KSA1HTTU-eMC	? uses some primary sources, author is not well known.	no signs that it is not reliable	about the subject	? 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}}.

References

Y last source - is considered independent even a small percentage of the info might be from primary source. If the book is an autobiography, then it would considered not independent. Cassiopeia talk 07:01, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

13. Please answer if the subject meets the "subject specific notability" guidelines, Which subject specific notability based on the given content above, and specify under (1) which notability criteria they meet or fail (example - MUSICBI#1 if certain sub set of criteria is applicable) and (2) reasons/explanations.

Answer: Yes, meets all 4 WP:ARCHITECT criteria.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:01, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

---

14.

Jordan Lennon (born February 22, 2000), is a British film producer and actor. Lennon is currently a member of BAFTA. He continues to work aside 20th Century Fox, Warner Bros, Wicked Wales, Capture Studios, Cineworld, Paramount Pictures, and Rockefeller Foundation.

At age 16, the Vice President of 20th Century Fox, Paul Higginson. Who previously worked on Star Wars, Titanic, and Independence Day took on Jordan and Rowan Snow as a mentor. In December 2018, Jordan and Rowan finished British Film Academy. Jordan lived in Skelmersdale for 10 years before moving to Rhyl, North Wales. He's currently writing 'Stranger in the Night' scrreenplay for Warner Brothers.

Source assessment table:

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm8902348/	broken link	broken link	broken link	✘ No
http://www.bafta.org/wales	? irrelevant	? irrelevant	no mention of jordan lennon	✘ No
https://www.linkedin.com/in/jordan-d-98111a125	primary source	linked in is not reliable	unavailable profile	✘ No
https://www.behindthevoiceactors.com/Jordan-David/	about Jordan David	about Jordan David	about Jordan David	✘ No
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}}.

References

N (1) Even it is a broken link for the Instagram source - it is always considered not reliable and not independent of any subjects. (2) for bafta source - independent (no- as he is affiliated with BAFTA - Reliable - general yes (3) for behind the voiceactons source - it is indepent but not reliable and not significant.

see below

Source assessment table:

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
imdb.com	subject is affiliated with BAFTA thus the source is not independent	IMDb contains user-generated content	The source is a short biography of the subject	✘ No
bafta.org	Again, the subject is affiliated with BAFTA	BAFTA, being a major national charity -likely to be reliable	no information about the subject becomes apparent	✘ No
linkedin.com	profiles are normally created by their subjects	user-generated - therefore unreliable	Profile of the subject	✘ No
behindthevoiceactors.com	not connection to the subject	Source is well known website	The source is about the subject but not much info	✘ No
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}}.

Cassiopeia talk 07:01, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

15. Please answer if the subject meets the "subject specific notability" guidelines, Which subject specific notability based on the given content above, and specify under (1) which notability criteria they meet or fail (example - MUSICBI#1 if certain sub set of criteria is applicable) and (2) reasons/explanations.

Answer: No, zero sources meet GNG.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:01, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

---

16.

Sonny Bill Williams 2010

Sonny William Williams (born 3 August 1985), who is a Muslim, is a New Zealand All blacks rugby union footballer, Williams was a Marist Saints junior when he was spotted playing in Auckland by Bulldogs talent scout John Ackland. In 2002 he was offered a contract and moved to Sydney (as the youngest player to ever sign with an NRL club) to play in the Bulldogs' junior grades.

Source assessment table:

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-7505117/2019-Rugby-World-Cup-Sonny-Bill-Williams-expecting-fourth-child.html	secondary source	There is consensus that the Daily Mail (including its online version, MailOnline) is generally unreliable	about the subject	✘ No
http://stats.allblacks.com/asp/Profile.asp?ABID=1108	secondary source	probably reliable	about the subject	✔ Yes
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/warriors-league-team/news/article.cfm?c_id=360&objectid=10399308	secondary source	probably reliable	about the subject	✔ Yes
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/10/01/1096527943523.html	secondary source	no indication of unreliability	about the subject	✔ Yes
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}}.

References

Y Except for stats.allblacks.com source - it is not independent as the subject played for the New Zealand national team called "All Blacks" in Rugby union. Cassiopeia talk 07:01, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

17. Please answer if the subject meets the "subject specific notability" guidelines, Which subject specific notability based on the given content above, and specify under (1) which notability criteria they meet or fail (example - MUSICBI#1 if certain sub set of criteria is applicable) and (2) reasons/explanations. Cassiopeia talk 07

01, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Answer: Yes, passes WP:RL/N and WP:NRU.

Y Cassiopeia talk 07:01, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

---

18.

Bryan Adams Guadalajara 2006

"Can't Stop This Thing We Started" is a song by Canadian singer and songwriter Bryan Adams. The song was written by Adams and Robert John "Mutt" Lange, and was the second single from Adams' 1991 album Waking Up the Neighbours where by the song was nominated for Grammy Award 1992 "Song of the Year"

Weekly charts

Chart (1991-1992)	Peak position
US Mainstream Rock (Billboard)	2
Denmark (IFPI)	2
US Billboard Hot 100	2

| class="col-break col-break-2" |

End-of-year charts

End-of-year chart (1991)	Position
Canada Top Singles (RPM)	3

Source assessment table:

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.nytimes.com/1992/01/09/arts/grammy-short-list-many-for-a-few.html	secondary	consensus	about subject	✔ Yes
https://www.billboard.com/music/Bryan-Adams/chart-history/RTT	secondary	consensus	about subject	✔ Yes
https://www.billboard.com/music/Bryan-Adams/chart-history/HSI	secondary	consensus	about subject	✔ Yes
https://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/discover/films-videos-sound-recordings/rpm/Pages/image.aspx?Image=nlc008388.2024&URLjpg=http%3a%2f%2fwww.collectionscanada.gc.ca%2fobj%2f028020%2ff4%2fnlc008388.2024.gif&Ecopy=nlc008388.2024	secondary	consensus	about subject	✔ Yes {{ source assess https://www.musicvf.com/song.php?title=Can%27t+Stop+This+Thing+We+Started+by+Bryan+Adams&id=7272	source =	ind_just = secondary	rel_just = no consensus	sig_just = about subject }}
https://musicchartsarchive.com/singles/bryan-adams/cant-stop-this-thing-we-started	secondary	no indication of unreliability	about subject	✔ Yes
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}}.

References

Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:19, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

19. Please answer if the subject meets the "subject specific notability" guidelines, Which subject specific notability based on the given content above, and specify under (1) which notability criteria they meet or fail (example - MUSICBI#1 if certain sub set of criteria is applicable) and (2) reasons/explanations.

Answer: Yes, passes Wikipedia:Notability_(music)#Singles.

N It is under song and not single. The subject is notable under (1) WP:NSONG#1 because for national music charts. Cassiopeia talk 07:19, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

---

20.

Kamlesh Bhatt is a Solution Architect and a DevOps Engineer living in Singapore. I am a fan of technology, music, and entrepreneurship. He is interested in photography and travel. He could be reached at his blog and youtube channel.

Source assessment table:

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://medium.com/@kamleshbhatt_	self-published	self-published	about subject	✘ No
https://www.linkedin.com/in/kamlesh-bhatt-45392961/	self-published	self-published	about subject	✘ No
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}}.

References

Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:19, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

21. Please answer if the subject meets the "subject specific notability" guidelines, Which subject specific notability based on the given content above, and specify under (1) which notability criteria they meet or fail (example - MUSICBI#1 if certain sub set of criteria is applicable) and (2) reasons/explanations.

Answer: No. Fails all four WP:CREATIVE criteria.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:19, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

---

Communication

FormalDude See Assignment 2 above. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Cassiopeia, I'll start working on it! ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲 talk 06:42, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia I'm confused by the next section that starts with question #8. It says there is an example, but I'm not seeing one? ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲 talk 05:54, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude Click "Show" under "Source assessment table: show". Cassiopeia talk 05:59, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia Yes, I see that. The yes/no is already filled out for questions nine and ten, are they both examples? ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲 talk 06:06, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude I see. I have removed them and try not to look at the hist diff for the info and work on the assignment. What you need to do is to add "n" or "y" after the "=" on ind,rel and sing. and put your reason after the ind_just, rel_just and sig_just in the "show table" - see below

| ind = y | ind_just = reasons | rel = y | rel_just = | sig = y | sig_just =

(NOTE: I took about the answers of the example in Q-8 as well. Thanks for informing. Cassiopeia talk 06:16, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲 talk 10:14, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Hey Cassiopeia, hope you're doing well! Just so you know, question #18 does not list any sources in the table. ––FormalDude talk 04:56, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude Thank you for informing. Added sources. Cassiopeia talk 05:24, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, I've completed the assignment. ––FormalDude talk 04:40, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude pls provide your reasons for the answers from Q10-Q20 on the source tables. Ping me when you have finished answering them. Cassiopeia talk 01:35, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay. I've answered the questions. I'll try to be better at completing the assignments in a more timely manner. Thanks for your help @Cassiopeia! ––FormalDude talk 23:32, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude See comments above and let me know if you have any questions or you are ready to move on to the next assignment. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia talk 07:19, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, thanks for your feedback, I've had the chance to review it. Ready for the next assignment! ––FormalDude talk 07:44, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

---

Content Policy

Article titles

Please read WP:TITLE and answer the questions below

1. Article name "Hannibal Barca" - Does the article name need to be change? and Why? (please explain based on Wikipedia guidelines and name/link the guidelines in your answer)

Hannibal Barca was a Carthaginian general and statesman who is widely considered one of the greatest military commanders in history. His father, Hamilcar Barca, was a leading Carthaginian commander during the First Punic War (264–241 BC).

References

Answer: Need to be changed to "Hannibal" in order to meet WP:COMMONNAME.

Y. This also apply to subjects known by they nick names - such as professional wrestler CM Punk, whose real name is Phillip Jack Brooks, Roman emperor Caligula whose name is Gaius Caesar or a special way of addressing a subject such as Alexander the Great and not "just Alexander" or "Alexander III of Macedon". Cassiopeia talk 09:49, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

---

2. Article name "Magic Johnson". Does the article name need to be change? and Why?(please explain based on Wikipedia guidelines and name/link the guidelines in your answer)

Earvin "Magic" Johnson Jr. (born August 14, 1959) is an American retired professional basketball player and former president of basketball operations of the Los Angeles Lakers of the National Basketball Association (NBA). He played point guard for the Lakers for 13 seasons.

References

Answer: Does not need to be changed as it complied with WP:COMMONNAME.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 09:49, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

---

Biographies of living persons

Please read WP:BLP and answer the questions below.

3. As per the texts below, pls explain the if the content is acceptable of inclusive and why. (please explain based on Wikipedia guidelines and name/link the guidelines in your answer)

Conor Anthony McGregor (born 14 July 1988) is an Irish professional mixed martial artist and boxer. His is a former Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) featherweight and lightweight champion.

On 15 August 2019, TMZ Sports published a video that appeared to show McGregor punching a man at The Marble Arch Pub in Dublin. The incident happened on 6 April and was originally reported by Irish media, although without the video that showed the attack. Irish police stated in April that they had opened an investigation. McGregor was charged with assault and first appeared in court on 11 October 2019.

In April 2019, McGregor is the father of Terri Murray's son, Clodagh. Murray bedded McGregor in 2017 at his hotel after the Aintree Grand National just four weeks bofore McGregor's girlfriend Dee Devlin gave birth to their son.

References

Answer: Remove "In April 2019, McGregor is the father of Terri Murray's son, Clodagh. Murray bedded McGregor in 2017 at his hotel after the Aintree Grand National just four weeks bofore McGregor's girlfriend Dee Devlin gave birth to their son" as unsourced. BLP claims must meet WP:VERIFY.

The first part should likely be included in the article, but probably needs to be reworded from a more reliable sources and a WP:NPOV, as most editors consider TMZ a low-quality source and prefer more reliable sources when available. Fox News is better as there is consensus that Fox News is generally reliable for news coverage on topics other than politics and science.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 09:49, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

---

4. As per the texts below, pls explain the if the content is acceptable of inclusive and why. (please explain based on Wikipedia guidelines and name/link the guidelines in your answer)

Diana Nyad (née Sneed; born August 22, 1949) is an American author, journalist, motivational speaker, and long-distance swimmer who lives in 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW in Washington, D.C. and could be contacted at +0-202-456-6213. Nyad gained national attention in 1975 when she swam around Manhattan (28 mi or 45 km) and in 1979 when she swam from North Bimini, The Bahamas, to Juno Beach, Florida (102 mi (164 km)). In 2013, on her fifth attempt and at age 64, she became the first person confirmed to swim from Cuba to Florida without the aid of a shark cage, swimming from Havana to Key West (110 mi or 180 km).

References

Answer: The address is incorrect and likely the phone number too, and they are unsourced, and WP:BLP specifically states "Do not use public records that include personal details, such as date of birth, home value, traffic citations, vehicle registrations, and home or business addresses." However, everything else is acceptable for inclusion.

Y Also per WP:BLPPRIVACY and WP:BLPREMOVE. Btw the address and phone number are belong to the White House. Cassiopeia talk 09:49, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

---

Images copyright

Please read Wikipedia:Image use policy and Wikipedia:Public domain image resources. Please answer the questions below and (1) with explanation based on Wikipedia guidelines and (2) provide the guidelines/links in your answer.

5. Could this image-1 be uploaded into C:Main Page and used in Wikipedia? and Why.

Answer- Explanation: Yes, public domain.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 09:49, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Answer - link/guideline: Wikipedia:Public domain image resources

Y. Cassiopeia talk 09:49, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

6. Could this image-2 be uploaded into C:Main Page and used in Wikipedia? and Why.

Answer- Explanation: Yes, public domain.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 09:49, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Answer - link/guideline: Wikipedia:Public domain image resources

Y. Also as per WP:IUP#Free licenses. Always check the initial source - If we

click on the flickr link provided on the right of the image it will take your to [3] where it was uploaded by the owner and stated PD there. Cassiopeia talk 09:49, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

7. Could this image-3 be uploaded into C:Main Page and used in Wikipedia?

Answer- Explanation: : Yes, public domain.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 09:49, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Answer - link/guideline: Wikipedia:PUBLICDOMAIN

Y. Cassiopeia talk 09:49, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

8. Could this image-4 be uploaded into C:Main Page and used in Wikipedia? and Why.

Answer- Explanation: No, likely copyrighted.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 09:49, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Answer - link/guideline: Wikipedia:Non-free content

Y. Cassiopeia talk 09:49, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

---

Neutral point of view

P;lease read WP:NPOV and MOS:PUFF. Point out the WP:NPOV words/pharses and rewrite the paragraph on Question 9& 10 from a neutral point of view.

9. She is a brilliant boxer with a rare and exceptional beauty. She turned Pro at the age of 19 after winning one amateur fight on December 14, 2013 where she destroyed her opponent in 20 seconds. Her talent and marketability made her a fighter to watch right out the gate and she fought under XXX promotion on her next fight on February 2014.

Answer: She became a pro boxer at age 19 after winning an amateur fight on December 14, 2013 in less than 20 seconds. She fought under XXX promotion on her next fight in February 2014.

Y. We could also remove in less than 20 seconds as well. Cassiopeia talk 09:49, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

10. He is a popular, acclaimed Bulgarian actor, who loves by all who have watched his films. He was born in Veliko Tarnovo and started working in the film industry since he was at the tender, innocent of the age of 14 and he has featured in 44 films.

Answer: Born in Veliko Tarnovo, he started working in the film industry at age 14, and has gone on to become a popular actor featured in over 40 films.

Y I think you meant to write "44 flims" instead of "40 films". Cassiopeia talk 09:49, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

11. Please read WP:DUE and in your own words, please explain why it is important to provide balance and due weight content in an article.

Answer: It is important to represent viewpoints with equity. This is different from representing viewpoints equally, as journalistic sources would. Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia and as such, viewpoints are represented on a weighted scale according to the weight they carry regarding a topic. If each viewpoint were mentioned equally, not only would Wikipedia be even longer than it already is, but it would be extremely biased. Proper Wikipedia:DUEWEIGHT ensures encyclopedic neutrality.

Y. Example - Capital punishment the article states the view of for and against of the punishment for a crime. Cassiopeia talk 09:49, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

---

No original research

Please read WP:OR and WP:NOT and answer the questions below

12. In your own words, why Wikipedia is not a platform to publish original research?

Answer: Wikipedia is not interested in one individuals opinion, stance, or observations. Such material is anecdotal. Wikipedia seeks neutrality by primarily relying on combinations of reliable published secondary sources that include critical analysis and detailed study that goes beyond mere self-observations.

Y. Wikipedias policies require all the content to be previously published by independent, reliable sources for any opinions or ideas or original research a is considered subjective point of view (non independent), not reviewed or fact checked by reliable sources. Cassiopeia talk 09:49, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

13. In your own words, please provide one example with explanation when it is appropriate to insert an original research or an opinion in an article.

Answer: When such opinions are held by multiple reliable sources or experts, it is appropriate to insert them into an article, in order to give due weight. For example, the opinion of a politician on a controversial policy is likely acceptable encyclopedic content, when sourced reliably. If the source, however, were to be you personally overhearing the politician make a statement, that would be original research, and not appropriate.

N. We could use exact words from the source in the article when (1) it is a public domain sites (2) the author/site has released their copyright and anyone to use the content/image such as " agree to irrevocably agree to release content/image under the CC BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL or under the Creative Commons license. (3) a direct quote and provide the source. Example Constitution of the United States and in Robert Whittaker (fighter) page (see below direct quote). Cassiopeia talk 09:49, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

14. See this video and write the content in the in an article by using the video info as the source.

Answer: When asked if Islam allows women to wear jeans and trousers, Sh. Shady Alsuleiman stated that "[for both men and women] our clothing must be baggy/loose, non see-through, non colorful/attractive, and it must be covering the darwah. Jean do not fit these conditions."

Y The above is written as "direct quote" or we could paraphrase it in our own words. Cassiopeia talk 09:49, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

---

Verifiability

Please read WP:V and answer the questions below

15. If the subject has two sons and it is supported by three independent, reliable sources but in reality he has 3 sons. Could we change the content from "2" sons to "3 sons"? and why?

Answer: No, not unless more independent reliable sources say that he has 3 sons. Verifiability means article text is clearly evidenced by the citations. If no sources say he has 3 sons, even if he does have 3 sons, Wikipedia cannot verify that, and therefore cannot say that.

Y - see WP:But it's true. Cassiopeia talk 09:50, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

---

FormalDude See Assignment 3 above. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia talk 08:54, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia I have finished the assignment . ––FormalDude talk 20:00, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude Good work. See above comments and let me know if you have any questions or you are ready to move on to the next assignment. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia talk 09:49, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia Read and noted your comments. Ready to move to the next one! ––FormalDude talk 13:48, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Filtering - Criteria for speedy deletion

PART 2

We have looked at the requirements needed for a page to meet notable, policy and type of sources to merit a page in Wikipedia in Part 1 (Assignment 1, 2 & 3). In assignment 4, we look at what type of articles need to be filtered out from our system when reviewing a page. There are many criteria of WP:Criteria for speedy deletion. Here we discuss (1) General criteria (G1-G14), (2) Article criteria (A1-A11) and R2.

Please do the following

1. Pls set up your CSD log by installing MYCSD so I could review your CSD nomination. After saving, you have to bypass your browser's cache to see the changes - see instruction at Wikipedia:Bypass your cache.
2. Bookmark Earwig's Copyvio Detector in computer; and install Earwig Copyvio Detector script. (The "copyvio" will appear on the left panel under "Tools" section on every page in Wikipedia.
3. Install CV-revdel and after saving, you have to bypass your browser's cache to see the changes - see instruction at Wikipedia:Bypass your cache.

 Done. My CSD log is available at User:FormalDude/CSD log. ––FormalDude talk 01:45, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

General criteria

1. Please (G1-G14) at General and answer the following questions in your own words.

No	Criterion	Application	Comment by Cass
1	G1	All of the text is nonsense. Nonsense includes content that does not make sense or is not meaningful.	Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
2	G2	This applies to pages created to test editing or other Wikipedia functions.	Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
3	G3	This applies to pages that are blatant and obvious misinformation, blatant hoaxes (including files intended to misinform), and redirects created by cleanup from page-move vandalism.	Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
4	G4	This applies to sufficiently identical copies, having any title, of a page deleted via its most recent deletion discussion.	Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
5	G5	This applies to pages created by banned or blocked users in violation of their ban or block, and that have no substantial edits by others.	Y. Applies to creations of blocked or banned users during the time of their block. Also any page created by sock-puppet. Doesn't apply to templates or redirects. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
6	G6	This is for uncontroversial maintenance, technical deletions.	Y.Technical deletions of unnecessary empty categories, redirects, orphaned templates, pages created by mistake. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
7	G7	If requested in good faith and provided that the only substantial content of the page was added by its author.	Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
8	G8	Pages dependent on a non-existent or deleted page, such as talk pages with no corresponding subject page or subpages with no parent page.	Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
9	G9	In exceptional circumstances, the Wikimedia Foundation office reserves the right to speedy-delete a page.	Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
10	G10	Pages that were only created to insult a person or thing (such as "John Q. Doe is dumb").	Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
11	G11	Pages that were created only to say good things about a company, item, group or service and which would need to be written again so that they can be encyclopedic.	Y. Pages that created to promote the subject. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
12	G12	Articles that are obviously breaking copyright law.	Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
13	G13	Abandoned Drafts and Articles for creation submissions.	Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
14	G14	Unnecessary or redundant disambiguation pages.	Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Article and R2 criteria

1. Please (A1-G11) criteria at WP:CSD#List of criteria and answer the following questions in your own words.

No	Criterion	Application	Comment by Cass
1	A1	No context. Is very short and provides little or no meaning about the topic.	Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
2	A2	Articles written in a different language.	Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
3	A3	Articles containing no content, or only external links, citations, or categories.	Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
4	A5	Articles copied from another Wiki.	Y. Applies to any article that has only a dictionary definition, a primary source that has already been transwikied. Also an article on any subject that has been discussed at articles for deletion and as result moved to another wiki. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
5	A7	Any article, narrowly construed to certain topics, that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant	Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
6	A9	Any article related to musical recordings that has no indication of importance.	Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
7	A10	Recently created article that duplicates an existing topic.	Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
8	A11	This applies to any article that plainly indicates that the subject was invented/coined/discovered by the article's creator or someone the creator personally knows, and does not credibly indicate why its subject is important or significant.
9	R2	Cross-namespace redirects from the mainspace to any other category aside of Category:, Template:, Wikipedia:, Help: and Portal.	Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

---

3. Please read WP:PROMOTION and WP:G11 and provide 5 successful CSD 11 articles you have nominated from Special:NewPagesFeed (New Page Patrol or Article for Creation section). Pls provide the article names and hist diffs and I will check them at your CSD log.

Answer i:

1. Article: Rajesh WD Type: CSD G11 Subtype: ({{db-spam}}) Notified: Rajesh Kumar Ukaro (talk · contribs) Date: 15:54, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
   

Y. Good. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Answer ii:

1. Article: Sedona conference Type: multiple criteria (A7, G11, G12) additional information: {G12 url: thesedonaconference.org} Notified: CynK6 (talk · contribs) Date: 18:17, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

N. It is not G11 but G12. Admin has moved the page to draft - see here and I have tagged G12 (copyvio). Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude For your info - the page has been deleted for G12 - [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sedona_conference see here]. Cassiopeia talk 23:28, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Answer again: Draft:Helen O'Grady Drama Academy - October 2021 #19

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:25, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Answer iii:

1. Article: Draft:Sanoj Thekkekara Type: CSD G11 ({{db-spam}}) Notified: Sanojthekkekara (talk · contribs) Date: 08:52, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Answer iv:

1. Article: Msc Institute Type: multiple criteria (A7, G11) Notifed: Satveer Choudhary (L.C) (talk · contribs) Date: 00:48, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Answer v:

1. Article: Matru Pal Type: multiple criteria (A9, G11); requested creation protection (salting) Notified: Mramankum (talk · contribs) Date: 18:32, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

---

Pls read WP:COPYVIO, WP:REVDEL, WP:COPYPASTE, WP:DCM and WP:G12 and answer the questions below.

3. When do we nominated a page for WP:G12 and when do we WP:REVDEL the COPYVIO text?

Answer: G12 and revdel is for pages and content that obviously breaks copyright law.

Y We nominate a page for G12 when the content is unsalvageable due to multiple copyright violations and We nominate a page for G12 when the content is unsalvageable due to multiple copyright violations. If there's a chance to delete the revisions which violate the copyright and save other content, we request REVDEL If there's a chance to delete the revisions which violate the copyright and save other content, we request REVDEL. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

4. What constitute copyright infringement/violation.

Answer: Content that the reuse of breaks copyright law.

Y. Copyright violation is: text copied from the sources that are not public domain or without permission or copyright holder, close paraphrasing. For images - if the image fails to comply with one of the free licences. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

5. Why some of the texts found in an article are identical as per its sources and yet they are not considered copyright violation? Please provide three examples.

Answer i: The content is public domain.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Answer ii: The content is licensed for commercial reuse and is properly attributed.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Answer iii: The content originated from Wikipedia and the source is citing Wikipedia.

N You answer of this belong to the answer ii (permission to use it is granted by the copyright holder). If texts found in an article are identical as per its sources and yet they are not considered copyright violation because the text is placed in a quote with a supporting reference/source. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

6. Why copyright violation needs to be stamped out from Wikipedia and who determined when a violation is lawfully taking place?

Answer: Wikipedia can be held legally and financially responsible for copyright violations. Not sure about the latter part of this question... any properly experienced editor can determine when a violation is taking place.

Y. Copyright infringement violation entails legal implications. Wikipedia talk violation of copyvio "very seriously". Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

---

7. Pls read WP:COPYVIO, WP:REVDEL, WP:COPYPASTE, WP:DCM and WP:G12 and provide 5 successful CSD 12 articles you have nominated from Special:NewPagesFeed (New Page Patrol or Article for Creation section). Pls provide the article names and I will check them at your CSD log. You can use Earwig's Copyvio Detector tool to check if an article is in violation of COPYVIO.

Answer i: Draft:Helen O'Grady Drama Academy

Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Answer ii: Draft:FON TECH

Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Answer iii: Draft:Jevon Martin

Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Answer iv: Draft:Arun Kumar Saini

Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Answer v: Draft:PT Lima Rachmat Sejahtera

Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

'

---

8. Pls provide 5 successful CSD in any criteria except WP:G11, WP:G12 and WP:G13 articles you have nominated from Special:NewPagesFeed (New Page Patrol "ONLY"). Pls provide the article names and I will check them at your CSD log.

Answer i: Corey Maison

FormalDude the nomination was in 2017. Pls provide another CSD (from October 2021 onward) and pls specify which CSD and provide the # on XXX month from you CSD log. (Example for Corey Maison - December 2017 #2 - see your CSD log. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Answer again: Draft:Keith A. Whitener - October 2021 #48

Y G4. Cassiopeia talk 09:47, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Answer ii: Witch trials in the Low Countries

FormalDude no CSD for this page. Pls provide another nomination. (from Oct 2021 onward)

Answer again: Dan James Clarke - October 2021 #44

N it was only G11 but not G4. - No previous AfD deletions. The question is any CSDs except WP:G11, WP:G12 and WP:G13

Answer again: The Edge of Tomorrow (Howard Fast book) - October 2021 #32

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:25, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Answer iii: Oh, harder daddy

FormalDude You need to be the one who nominates the CSD for the page. Pls provide another nomination. (from Oct 2021 onward)

Answer again: Draft:Triveni Institute of Dental Sciences Hospital & Research Centre - October 2021 - #20

N only G11. The question is any CSDs except WP:G11, WP:G12 and WP:G13

Answer again: Hugh Warren Williams - October 2021 #13

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:25, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Answer iv: Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W800

{u|FormalDude}} You need to be the one who nominates the CSD for the page. Pls provide another nomination. (from Oct 2021 onward)

Answer again: Draft:Helen O'Grady Drama Academy - October 2021 #19

N only G11. The question is any CSDs except WP:G11, WP:G12 and WP:G13

Answer again: St.Mary immaculate Heart of Church - October 2021 #22

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:25, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Answer v: Sedona conference

FormalDude No CSD for this page - Admin move to draft space and I tagge CSD copyvio. Btw, on page can be used only one time for the assignment. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Answer again: Draft:Coldmobi - October 2021 - #2

N only G11. The question is any CSDs except WP:G11, WP:G12 and WP:G13

Answer again: Ashfall warning - October 2021 #10

N This page was not tagged by you but it was a AfD which you voted for G5 - see here. Cassiopeia talk 00:25, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

---

9. Pls read WP:R2 and WP:NPPDRAFT. Please explain when to a new page (NPP article) can be nominated for CSD R2 and what should be considered when doing such move?

Answer: Applies to redirects from the main namespace to any other namespace aside from Category:, Template:, Wikipedia:, Help: and Portal and should be considered when they are not beneficial to the reader.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 09:47, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

---

10. Pls read and A1-A11 and R2 at WP:CSD and and provide 5 successful "Article CSD" articles (with at least two of them are CSD A7) you have nominated from Special:NewPagesFeed (New Page Patrol "ONLY").Pls provide the article names and I will check them at your CSD log.

Answer i CSD A7: Er.Sandeep M. Maurya (Omee Maurya)

Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Answer ii CSD A7: Corey Maison FormalDude the nomination was in 2017. Pls provide another CSD (from October 2021 onward) and pls specify which CSD and provide the # on XXX month from you CSD log. (Example for Corey Maison - December 2017 #2 - see your CSD log. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Answer again: Jairus Radio Inc. - October 2021 #30

N only G5. The question is for CSD A7.

Answer again: Brady James Anderson - October 2021 #14

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:25, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Answer iii CSD R2: Dramatikz

Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Answer iv CSD R2: Hugh Warren Williams

Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Answer v any criteria: Matru Pal

Y.A7. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

---

Copyright violation and paid editors

Pls read WP:COI and WP:PAID and answer the following question

11. How do we spot a COI/PAID editor?

Answer: When editors have an an apparent COI. This exists when there is reason to believe that an editor has a COI based on their editing behavior. For example, an editor knowing details about a person that do not appear in any sources. Y. See further info on Notes section. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

12. What you should do when you review an NPP article and notice the creator is a COI editor?

Answer: Notify the editor of Wikipedia COI guidelines, tag the page as having COI contributions, and fix an material that may be unsuitable, including considering the article for deletion if it is entirely unsuitable. Y. Report to WP:COIN if needed. Add {{subst:Uw-coi}} to their talk page and and tag COI on the page via twinkle. Editor can create/edit a COI page if they WP:Disclose it on the article talk page and their user page and edit the content with NPOV. COI editor can create a page in new page, however, many admins do ague they should go through AfC just like WP:PAID editors. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

13. Please read WP:PAID. What you should do when you review an NPP article and notice the creator is a paid editor?

Answer: Notify the editor of Wikipedia Paid editing guidelines, tag the page as having Paid contributions, and fix an material that may be unsuitable, including considering the article for deletion if it is entirely unsuitable. Y Report to WP:COIN if needed. Add {{subst:Uw-coi}} to their talk page and and tag COI on the page via twinkle. Move (do a R2) the page to draft space regardless how many edits and how many pages the editors have created. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

---

FormalDude See Assignment 4 above. Assignment 4 and 5 are the hardest assignment in this program besides the Final exam. Take your time to answer the questions. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia talk 15:20, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude Hi I have posted the assignment for more than 2 weeks but I have yet to see you work on it. Let me know if you have any questions or help. Cassiopeia talk 00:35, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia Sorry for the delay, I've been busy. Getting started now. ––FormalDude talk 01:45, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude Thank you for the reply. Let me know if you need help. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia talk 01:58, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia I've never nominated an article for CSD R2 and I'm having trouble finding any that apply looking at recently created redirects. ––FormalDude talk 07:14, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude Note on R2 to draft space for this progam- We move articles to the draftspace to allow articles to be developed further for unsourced WP:BLP articles where by the articles do have the potential to be notable. Use R2 sparingly as some admins do not like pages to be move to draft page even WP:NPPDRAFT states the move is a safe place for editor to adding necessary sources, they would deem the if the articles are not improved or edit in 6 months, it could be nominated G13. It is different from page move (via Twinkle). R2 needs to be norminated (not move by editor) and admin would moved the page to other name space (in this program - move article from main space to draf space). To tag R2 see Template:Db-r2 and before do R2 - pls read WP:NPPDRAFT careful. You can find R2 articles "HERE" under "New page patrol section and set the "filter" for State=unreview page, Predicated class=sub and That=have no citations. There are estimated 300+ new articles created daily in New page Patrol section, so you would be able to find them. Cassiopeia talk 09:02, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia I guess I'm still a little confused. R2 is for redirects only, correct? Or it is for any NPP that should be draftified? ––FormalDude talk 17:26, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude it is not only for draftifiled from main space only but also for redirect/move to other name space except the Category:, Template:, Wikipedia:, Help: and Portal: namespaces. Since this program is due with new page reivew, thus we just limit the R2 from new page to draft. Pls do not confused with Twinckle "move" function as that dont need to invovle admin. R2 does require admin to do the move after the article has been nominated/requested by an editor. Editor can only R2 the with "page move" user right which is a right need to be requested after an editor has requested many R2 where their nomination in the past deem fit. Here you can look for "unsourced new page BLP article (usually sub class)" which has potential to be accepted/met notability guidlines in new pages if the article is provided by independent, reliable source if the creator of the article improving the article in draft space. Hope this help. Cassiopeia talk 19:56, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia Can you confirm that I Don't Feel Like No Hero Tonight (song) this was an approprriate NPP article to draftify please? ––FormalDude talk 21:11, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude The article is not suitable for drafty as it is not a potential article that would meet notability at this stage (as per this-1 version prior it was redirected to Mickey Gilley). This -2 would be suitable as the subject won the silver medal at the 2020 Summer Paralympics. Mark Striegl is the one of the example not to be draftify but for AfD (we would look at AfD in next assignment). Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia talk 23:38, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia I think I'm figuring it out, but I have a few clarifying questions. If you have time, could we hop into a live chat somewhere by chance? I have discord and IRC, or we can use a one time chat service like Stinto. ––FormalDude talk 23:46, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude I am on IRC (#wikipedia-en connect) - under General channels with nickname "Cass". Kindly connect and see if you can find me. Cassiopeia talk 00:11, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude pls look for "Guest5597" as I am on IRC En Wikipedia and I have just sent you a message. Cassiopeia talk 00:20, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia I've completed the assignment. ––FormalDude talk 07:31, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude Give me a day of two to review it and I will come back to you. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia talk 09:14, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude See comments above and pls re-answer some of the questions. See notes section below prior work on the questions. Sorry for taking a little longer than usual to review the assignment. Cassiopeia talk 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia: I've re-answered the questions and reviewed the new notes below. ––FormalDude talk 07:18, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude See comment on the questions/answers above, and provide specific CSD as stated. Stay safe and thank you. Cassiopeia talk 09:47, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia: Sorry about that, I've reanswered the questions. Thanks. ––FormalDude talk 04:29, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude Reviewed. See comments above. Stay safe and best.

---

Notes

G11 (promo) - What constitute a G11? At times it is hard to define. Although if a article is bluntly promote or advertise about the subject then it is a G11. Sometimes, the it is a little subtle and that would be a judgement call. As a rule of thumb, if article about an entertainers (actor/singer/DJ/artist and etc) in dept of how hard they work, how motivated they are, using all the puffery/flowery languages and especially the subject does not meet notability guidelines. For a corporation, we would see they list down all they product/services, their directors/key person in the company, they mission, their client, they are the influencer in their industrial, all the words/phrased to enhance/market the company and no substantial info that is supported by independent reliable sources.

G12 (copyvio) -

Copyright violation addresses the use of original expression without permission of the holder which is a violation of laws even the credit is given to the source. For articles, the Copyright Law gives the copyright protection to the “original works of authorship fixed in in a tangible medium of expression” in the newspaper, magazine and freelance article at the moment of their creation, for the life of the creator plus 70 years after, and 95 years for corporation publication or 120 years from date of creation, whichever is shorter.

A “fact” is not considered an original work of authorship; but how the ways facts are recorded where the style of the writing, choice and/or arrangement of words are copyrightable. An infringement of copyright is committed when a person uses the “exact words /almost exact words in a consecutive manner” of the author/holder. To note, as a guideline, a few words copies from the original works and an idea of expression such as "weather the storm", 'crossing the Rubicon" "as dead as a doornail" and etc. proper nouns, document/event/treaty/person/title/ names are generally acceptable and so is a direct quote of speech. However, any longer phrases which would be expression in a number of ways are copyright protected. To use one of two short sentences on a large article generally is ok but it will considered infringement if the edit entry is consists of big percentage of the original work and yet for some (such as newspaper/press/journalism that takes their work very seriously - anything more than 4 exact consecutively words would considered copyvio). To avoid copyright infringement, one needs uses his/her own words to convey the source’s information. Paraphrasing could minimize the the copyright violation; however, "threshold" ultimately, court judgement would determined the if copyright violation has been made.

Copyvio for texts or images shared the same notion that it is not a copyvio if the verbatim texts or images are taken from free licence and Public domain sites/specific page/image. Always check the "original source" even if in WikiCommon the editor who upload the image claim taken from a PD site, we need to check the link provided and if the site indicate the image taken from another source, then we check the source. For texts, we need to check the sites if it is a PD, sometimes the disclaimer of PD is not on the page, but on the home page or "about" page or FAQ page. Secondly, for older article (no in NPP Feed), any copyvio texts found, we will revdel it as it is almost always it is not the first versions. If a small amount of verbatim texts found in NPP Feed articles, we would revdel them; but large amount of verbatim texts we will tag G12.

Lastly, here are a few examples where the German car maker Audi was sued for copyright breach.

1. Audi infringed copyright violation over Eminem’s song “Lose Yourself” in their commercial advertising. [4]

2. Audi was fined US $ 965,000 over copyright infringement for using 10 words from Brian Andreas’s story of “Angel of Mercy” - [5]

I think I just had a wake-up call, and it was disguised as a car, and it was screaming at me not to get too comfortable and fall asleep and miss my life. (Audi commercial) Some people don’t know that there are angels whose only job is to make sure you don’t get too comfortable & fall asleep & miss your life.(Brian Andreas’ print)

Spot COI / PAID COI editors are permitted to edit Wikipedia and create on the affected articles; however, it is "HIGHLY DISCOURAGE/NOT RECOMMENDED as it is very difficult for the COI editors to write the article/input info into the affected article in [[WP:NPOV|neutral point of view}}.

1.Use person pronouns and possessives (I, we, my, our) 2.Multiple references to company, financial listings, staff lists, interviews, own publication, press release, blog and with clean references 3.Well written prose 'too perfect to be true' and only with single/2 edits 4.Editors have created multiple company related articles 5.Editors disclosed their COI/PAID in their userpage (not tag with COI disclose), or disclosure when they ask question in WP:Teahouse, WP:Help Desk, WP:AFCHD or receivers' talk pages.

A7/A9/A11 - Credible claim of significance - If the subject content do have such claim, then it is not a A7 even the article at the present stage of the article is not notable. Choose other method. (1) after a WP:BEFORE and found no independent reliable sources to support the notability requirements, then nominated for WP:AFD, or R2 to draft space if no sources are provided (do R2 sparingly). If it is a {[WP:BLP]] without source, then WP:BLPPROD or R2. - see Wikipedia:Credible claim of significance

Hope the above help. Note the above does not substitute the Wikipedia links and reading material I provided.

---

Filtering - Deletion policy & other alternatives

In assignment 4, we look at articles which fits in WP:Criteria for speedy deletion (CSD) where by the the articles are deleted within a few hours to 24 hours from the time of the nomination. In Assignment 5, we discuss the what actions should be taken for those articles do not fit under the CSD criteria but do not meet relevant criteria for content of the encyclopedia.

Please read WP:PROD, WP:BLPPROD, WP:MERGE, WP:DRAFTIFY, WP:NPPDRAFT and WP:REDIR, WP:AFD and answer the following questions. (Provide links and hisdiff where they are applied.)

1. Under what circumstances do we propose deletion (PROD) a page and why do we do that?

Answer: For uncontroversial deletion as a shortcut from the AfD process.

Y. We propose deletion if the article doesn't meet any of or AfD criteri as it doesn't require discussion, however if someone objected to PROD it can't be used anymore. Cassiopeia talk 02:21, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

2. What should we do before we PROD a page? and what should be considered /action during a nomination?

Answer: Determine if there's a valid reason for deletion, review the page history to make sure it hasn't been vandalized and confirm its eligibility for deletion.

Y.

Prior PRODing other alternative options should be considered

(1) enhance the article by adding IRS or move if possible (2) to drafts for improvement by the creator orother editors if the article has potential, merge or redirect. (3) check the history to make sure that current state was not caused as result of vandalism.

When nominating it's important to check if

(1) Has it been PRODed before

(2) Has it ever been a subject of AfD discussion

(3) Has it been undeleted

If any of the above mentioned is true we can't PROD anymore - PROD can be used only ones, however we can use AfD.

(4) inform the creator of the PRO and good idea to add the article on your watchlist. Cassiopeia talk 02:21, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

3. What is the criteria when nominated a BLPPROD? If we choose not to BLPPROD a page what are the alternatives? (give three examples with explanations)

Answer: Any articles that can be deleted without objection. Alternatives include AfD, CSD, and draftify.

FormalDude Pls give explanations (see questions)

Answer again: AFD could be used when the article has sourced that are not sufficient. CSD can be used it meets one of the CSD criteria inaddition to BLPPROD. Draftify can be used if it meets the draftification crtiera in addition to BLPPROD.

Y BLPROD when article has no source. The other alternative (1) AfD but pls do a WP:BEFORE first. (2) PROD if it is not a contravesial nomination. (3) Moved to draft if the R2 criteria is met (request a R2). 4. CSD if the page meet CSD criteria. (5) Place inline citation into the body text after find proper independent reliable sources an edit to meet GNG and mark review. Cassiopeia talk 06:23, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

4. In what circumstances we nominate an AFD and what step should be done prior such action.

Answer:

1. Articles that cannot possibly be attributed to reliable sources, including neologisms, original theories and conclusions, and hoaxes
2. Articles for which thorough attempts to find reliable sources to verify them have failed
3. Articles whose subjects fail to meet the relevant notability guideline (WP:N, WP:GNG, WP:BIO, WP:MUSIC, WP:CORP, and so forth)
4. Articles that breach Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living persons
5. Any other content not suitable for an encyclopedia

Y

In what circumstances we nominate an AFD when the article fails Wikipedia both GNG and SNG/SSG and doesn't fit into CSD, PROD, BLPPROD where the article may be controversial which require community discussion prior to deletion.

We need to do a WP:BEFORE (important) prior nominate an article for AfD, Cassiopeia talk 02:21, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

5 How long do PROD, BLPPROD and AFD last prior it is deleted or decline?

Answer: Minimum of seven days.

Y if the discussion has no conclusion or very limited editors join the discussion, the AfD will extend (relist) for another 7 days. Cassiopeia talk 02:21, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

6. When a page has been previously BLPROD and was provide a source; however if you still think that article should be deleted, what can you do?

Answer: Articles for deletion.

Y. BLPPROD doesn't supersede any of the other deletion policies, therefore the article previously tagged BLPPROD still can be deleted per speedy deletion, PROD or AfD criteria or it can be draftified or merged as per the current stage of the article. Also the article always be improved by adding more IRS (if any) especially if you know the article is notable as this is the good practice by reviewers to save the article which I have done it many times. Cassiopeia talk 02:21, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

7. When do we decide whether an article should be PROD or WP:BLPROD or WP:AFD?

Answer: If the deletion is controversial or not.

N. You need to specify on which one of the above is applied and need details explanation for each. Cassiopeia talk 02:21, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Answer again (pls provide explanation for each (PROD, BLPROD and AfD):

PROD - If the deletion is uncontroversial. For example, it would obviously be deleted if taken to AfD.

BLPROD - Similar to PROD, but for BLP. There is more that qualifies for BLPPROD than for just PROD alone because BLP has higher standards.

AFD - If the deletion requires discussion, i.e. not uncontroversial.

Y I would not say BLPPROD has a higher standards but it is a little more strict since info on BLP might effect the subject in real life since they are till "living" that is why IRSs are needed for BLP. Cassiopeia talk 03:02, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

8. What are the reason to WP:Merge a page to another page?

Answer: duplicate, overlap, short text, and context.

Y

(1) One article duplicates another.

(2) Merge 2 or more articles on related topics have a large bulk of the same content for an article with broader scope of content.

(3) Very short articles that aren't expected to be expanded to merge in another larger article. Cassiopeia talk 02:21, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

9. List 10 reasons we purpose WP:REDIR.

Answer:

1. Alternative spelling/punctuation
2. Probably misspellings
3. sub-topics
4. Alternative names or titles
5. Closely related word
6. Differing capitalizations
7. Section links
8. Shortcuts
9. Adverbs/adjectives prior to noun forms
10. Disambiguation pages that don't have disambiguation in the title

Y Also for less specific forms of names and more specific forms of names to WP:COMMONNAME; punctuation issues (dashes to hyphens, and vice versa); from plurals to singular forms which are generally preffered. Cassiopeia talk 02:21, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

10. When article can be moved to draft space?

Answer: When it is not suitable for mainspace but could be developed.

Y. You need to explain a little more detail. We need to make sure the article has a potential to meet GNG, not a signel source is provided. If the article do have some info on the External link section, notes, official websites links then dont do a R2. Also, only do a R2/move to draft sparingly. Even though move to draft is a space place for the creator to add the relevant sources into the article -see WP:BURDEN but some admins would considered it is a "rod to deletion", since if the creator does not do add in the source and click the submission button, the article might nominate for deletion under G13 six months later. So be aware. Cassiopeia talk 02:21, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

11. Nominate 5 articles for WP:AFD by using WP:Twinkle and provide explanation of your nomination.

Answer 1: Murder of Joe Whitchurch - No SIGCOV, Wikipedia is not news.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:21, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Answer 2: Tamarack Developments Corporation - Not notable, no independent coverage, doesn't pass Wikipedia:ORGIND

Y - only one editor joined the AfD - see here. NCORP usually is very strict and 3 sources to me is not quite enough. Cassiopeia talk 02:21, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Answer 3: NuWave Communications - Not notable, lack of SGICOV in reliable sources

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:21, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Answer 4: Ardo (title) - no reliable sources, not verifiable or notable

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:21, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Answer 5: Evelyn B. Pantig - no sources, not notable.

Y The result is no consensus - see here but looking at the current sources in the article I have to agreed with you. Cassiopeia talk 03:02, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

12. Participate in 5 WP:AFD where by you are the first voter of the discussion. Please provide you reason either to delete, keep, redirect or merge.

Answer 1: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Filmstock Film Festival. Delete as it does not pass Wikipedia:GNG due to lack of WP:SIGCOV.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:21, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Answer 2: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/McKinney homicide. Keep as it does pass Wikipedia:Notability with lasting and significant coverage from secondary sources.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 09:19, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Answer 3: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Forest Is My Throne / Yggdrasill. Article does not meet Wikipedia:NALBUMS.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:21, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Answer 4: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nauru–Spain relations. No independent secondary coverage, does not pass WP:GNG.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:21, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Answer 5: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Embassy of Colombia, Caracas. Sources do not indicate topic is notable enough for an article.

Y. Even thought the AfD result was a keep - see here the voters did not provide sources and as per the current sources in the article do not provide enough IRS that talk "directly" to indicate the subject is notable. There might be many Spanish sources out there would have able to support the notability of the subject but I would be able to obtain them since I dont understand Spanish. Thus a yellow tick instead of cross here. Cassiopeia talk 03:02, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

13. Nominate 2 articles for WP:PROD and state your reasons.

Answer 1: Elisabeth Freundlich. No sources, journalists are not inherently notable.

N as per your nomination version - here. PROD does not mean article has no source and we can do the prop. Do do a WP:BEFORE. If there is no IRS source then we could the PROD; if but there are source but still does not meet GNG or SNG, then AfD. Cassiopeia talk

Answer 2: Galanin dibinda. No sources and does not pass WP:NMUSIC.

N as per your nomination version - here - same reasons as above. Cassiopeia talk 02:21, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Answer again 3: Up nushi - Meets criteria of Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not

Y. Cassiopeia talk 09:19, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Answer again 4: Zak Best - No reliable sources.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 09:19, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

14. Nominate 2 article for WP:BLPROD and state your reasons.

Answer 1: Atsushi Kousaka. No sources.

FormalDude Cant find your BLPROD as per here. Pls provide another article or let me know if I have miss your BLPROD.

Answer: Atsushi Kousaka. Wikilink was incorrect, sorry. Fixed.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 06:23, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Answer 2: Phil Short. No sources.

Y as per your nomination here, but was decline per reason - here. Need to check as per AfD prior requirement as per discussion on AfD section first next time. Cassiopeia talk 02:21, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

15.Nominate 2 article for WP:NPPDRAFT - R2 and state your reasons.

Answer 1: Rebel Moon - October 2021 #55

Y. Pls provide your nomination on creator talk page next time. Cassiopeia talk 02:21, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Answer 2: Darius Yektai - October 2021 #35

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:21, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

---

FormalDude See Assingment 5 above. This is the last difficult assingment besides the Final exam. As normal, pls provide explanation/analysis/reasons based on guidlines of your nominations and provide hist diffs, editor talk page hist diffs (AfD, Props and BLPProps and etc.) of the creators where you place your nomations Ping me when you have done. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia talk 00:30, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

@Cassiopeia: I've completed the assignment. ––FormalDude talk 07:37, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@Cassiopeia: Just wanted to confirm you received my notification. ––FormalDude talk 07:37, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude I have missed your ping. Will review either today or tmrw. Cassiopeia talk 00:41, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude, See comment above and ping me when you have provide "answer again" answers. Some of the AfD have yet to be closed, so I will review them when they are closed. Cassiopeia talk 02:21, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, thanks! I've re-answered everything accept the two PRODs, I'm still working on those. ––FormalDude talk 03:16, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude, I have reviewed some of the answers and still waiting for 1 AfD to be closed, 1 PROP to be closed and I PROD from you. By the way, I have posted assignment 6 for you last week and you can go ahead to work on the assignment since it is not a prerequire of Assignment 5. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia talk 03:02, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude, Reviewed. Cassiopeia talk 09:19, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

---

Tagging

In this assignment we look at tagging pages for problems. There any many tags available in Wikipedia and we will look at some of them here.

• Please enable Wikipedia:HotCat in your "Wikipedia references" - see How to enable/disable HotCat. The tool lists and proposes existing categories for auto-completion.
• Pls download StubSorter user script. The script is for adding/removing stub tags.
• Pls download Rater user script. The scripts provides a dialog interface to add, remove, or modify WikiProject banners, including class and importance assessment. Accessible from either the page itself or its talk page. after saving, you have to bypass your browser's cache to see the changes - see instruction at Wikipedia:Bypass your cache.
• Please enable User:Galobtter/Shortdesc helper gadget for editing, adding, and importing short descriptions.

 Done.

Tagging in the article

Please read WP:TAGGING and answer the questions below. Please provide explanation in your own words and provide hist diff when applicable.

1. Why do we place tags on the article?

Answer: In order to point out areas and ways the article can be improved and maintained. To identify problems in an article.

Y. For the editors they indicate certain problems that and need to be addressed and for the readers warns them about problematic content. If we able to solve the problem then solve it instead of taggings. Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

2. What does "drive by tagging" mean?

Answer: Tagging done by editors who are not involved in the development of an article and who do not take the time to addequetly identify problems.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

3. List down 8 common tagging should be avoided in an article?

Answer:

1. Too many tags
2. Redundent tags
3. Vague tags
4. Incorrect tags
5. Unhelpful tags
6. Drive-by tagging
7. Wikilawyering with tags
8. Tag slamming

Y. Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

4. When it is appropriate to remove the tags?

Answer: When the problem no longer exists and the talk page message is resolved (or there is no talk page message), any editor without a COI may remove the tag(s).

Y. Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

5. Tag 10 articles from Special:Newpagesfeed where appropriate tags are needed and provide associate personal message to creator using page curator tool.

(pls provide links)

i. Answer: Eastern Eels

FormalDude Cant find the hist diff. Pls provide - note: the article has been redirected. Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Eastern Eels - diff

Y. Cassiopeia talk 08:21, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

ii. Answer: Habitat/Species Management Area of Cahouane

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

iii. Answer: DZGN-DTV

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

iv. Answer: Salman the Persian (TV series)

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

v. Answer: Band des Bundes

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

vi. Answer: One Day at a Time (Marilyn Sellars album)

FormalDude Cant find the hist diff. Pls provide - note: the article has been redirected. Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

@Cassiopeia: Diff ––FormalDude ^talk 07:13, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:50, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

vii. Answer: Abreha we Atsbeha

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

viii. Answer: Shahrdari Sirjan F.C

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

ix. Answer: YNW Juvy

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

x. Answer: Sonatala, Khowai

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

6. Read Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types and use StubSorter user script. Tag 10 sub class article correctly from Special:Newpagesfeed. (pls provide links)

i. Answer: Empress Xiaohui (Song)

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

ii. Answer: 2021 Sydney SuperNight 2

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

iii. Answer: Ya Es Hora

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

iv. Answer: Chagum

/FormalDud Article was deleted. Pls provide another article. Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Answer again: @Cassiopeia: Diff ––FormalDude ^talk 07:13, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:50, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

v. Answer: Chieti Basket 1974

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

vi. Answer: Bhutan at the South Asian Games

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

vii. Answer: 2022 South Sydney Rabbitohs season

/FormalDud Article was deleted. Pls provide another article. Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Answer again: @Cassiopeia: Diff ––FormalDude ^talk 07:13, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:50, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

viii. Answer: Brookside Park Neighborhood (Indianapolis)

/FormalDud Article was deleted. Pls provide another article. Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Answer again: @Cassiopeia: Diff ––FormalDude ^talk 07:13, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:50, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

ix. Answer: Band des Bundes

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

x. Answer: Pradip Deshmukh

/FormalDud Article was deleted. Pls provide another article. Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Answer again: @Cassiopeia: Diff ––FormalDude ^talk 07:13, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:50, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Categorization

7. Please read Wikipedia:Categorization and assign 10 articles from Special:Newpagesfeed with one or more useful categories. You can check similar articles for potentially relevant categories. (pls provide links)

i. Answer: Women's Vietnamese Cup

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

ii. Answer: Disco Samba

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

iii. Answer: YNW Juvy

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

iv. Answer: 2021 Laois Senior Football Championship

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

v. Answer: Fattore C

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

vi. Answer: List of New Zealand women's national rugby union team matches

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

vii. Answer: List of acoustic guitar brands

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

viii. Answer: 2009 Torneo Internazionale Regione Piemonte

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

ix. Answer: 24 pounder

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

x. Answer: Spargapeithes

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Sorting

8. Please read Wikipedia:WikiProject and Wikipedia:Content assessment and tag 10 articles from Special:Newpagesfeed with appropriate WikiProject and class types on the articles' talk pages. Please use Rater user script. (pls provide links)

i. Answer: Ljubo Drndić

/FormalDud Article was deleted. Pls provide another article. Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Answer again: diff

Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:50, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

ii. Answer: Asia Minor (Kokomo album)

/FormalDud Article was deleted. Pls provide another article. Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Answer again: diff

Y. Cassiopeia talk 07:50, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

iii. Answer: Pierre Rolland (chess player)

/FormalDud Cant find the hist diff, pls provide another aritlce.

Answer again: diff

Y - added France Project - see here. Cassiopeia talk 07:50, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

iv. Answer: Women's Vietnamese Cup

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

v. Answer: WWE The Run-In

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

vi. Answer: Salman the Persian (TV series)

vii. Answer: MotoGP eSport Championship

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

viii. Answer: Shahrdari Sirjan F.C

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

ix. Answer: YNW Juvy

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

x. Answer: SOKO (TV series)

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Short description

9. short description suitable to allow a reader to identify which search result is most likely to suit their needs. All mainspace pages should have a description of what they are preferably limit to about 40 characters, but function is important. Please read Wikipedia:Short description and Wikipedia:WikiProject Short descriptions and provide 10 short descriptions in 10 different articles from Special:Newpagesfeed. Please enable User:Galobtter/Shortdesc helper prior making the edit. (pls provide links)

i. Answer: Quantum artificial intelligence

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

ii. Answer: Shin-Ru Shih

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

iii. Answer: London School of Musical Theatre

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

iv. Answer: Pittsburgh Metal

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

v. Answer: 2022 6 Hours of Abu Dhabi

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

vi. Answer: List of Master of None characters

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

vii. Answer: List of climate activists

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

viii. Answer: 2022 World Junior Ice Hockey Championships – Division I

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

ix. Answer: List of songs by the Wonderful Grand Band

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

x. Answer: 2021–22 ISU Speed Skating World Cup

Y. Pls provide the hist diff (the edit that you place the tagging). Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

---

FormalDude See Assignment 6 above. This assignment has no rerequisite from the previous assignment, so while we waiting for some of the AfD to be closed for Assignment 5, you can work on assignment 6. For any communicataion on assignment 5, pls post them on the communication section of Assignment 5 and same goes with Assignment 6. Stay safe. Cassiopeia talk 05:07, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, I've finished the assignment. ––FormalDude ^talk 12:09, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude See above comments and kindly provide articles which those articles you provided have been deleted or no hist diff can be found. Cassiopeia talk 03:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia Done. ––FormalDude ^talk 07:13, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude (1) Note: on "WikiProject Sorting" and "Catogories" - provide all possible Projects and categories based on the article content. (2) When provide hist diffs do provide the article name as well - example One Day at a Time (Marilyn Sellars album) - hist diff [[6]] (3) you missed Question 5 (i) answer. Pls provide and ping me. Cassiopeia talk 07:50, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude 5.(i) Reviewed. Cassiopeia talk 08:21, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

---

Communication and editor interactions

Wikipedia project is a collaboration of many editors, some are experienced and some are new to the Project ad Wikipedia values all constructive editors' contributions alike. Communication in a civil, respectful manner is a vital part in Wikipedia, and it should be welcomed rather than discouraged especially to new editors who are not familiar with Wikipedia guidelines and policies for most new editors find it is a steep learning curve during the first few months of editing articles or creating articles in Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia:Assume good faith, WP:BITE, WP:CIVIL, Wikipedia:Etiquette, and welcome template and answer the following questions. Do provide links and hist diff where appropriate.

Communication

1. How do we deal with a bad faith registered user and how do we deal with a bad faith IP editor?

Answer: I actually wrote an essay on this: Wikipedia:Responding to incivility.

N. I think you have misread or misunderstand the question above. I am one of the counter vandalism trainers in EN Wikipedia - see WP:CVUA besides being a trainer for NPPS. In CUVA we do discuss about bad faith and the respond of such situations. There is a different between bad faith and civility of an editor.

We start with good faith editors who edit Wikipedia for the purpose to improve the project/articles even at times they might make errors, especially new editors, as they do not know the Wikipedia guidelines or Wikitext/Wiki markup/ or template/table/MOS format, but "want" to improve or help Wikipedia project/article - example Bold when should not, do not spell out 0-9 (part of MOS guidelines), do not provide source and etc.

Bad faith editors are those who "intended" to harm Wikipedia with their edits even their edits, at times, looks similar to the good faith editor. Most bad faith edit that aim to harm Wikipedia can be spot right away as they are considered vandalism edits, but some are a little bit difficult. In those cases, we we could tell the different of their "intent" is by reading their talk page messages, their talk page history especially those messages have been removed by the editors, their contribution log to gauge if their edits are acted on good or bad faith. For those experienced counter vandalism editors or editor who are familiar with the subject, then it would be more easy to know if the edits are bad faith or not. Example, I am one of the regular MMA editor and watch all the UFC fights and many podcasts in social media. So I would know when editors are acted in bad faith when they change the nick name due to social media trolling or meme as many fighters do have some "interesting" nick names, or editor change the fight results due to they disagree with the judges or upset their supported fighters lose the match.

Civility is how the editors talk or respond to other editor in a well-mannered fashion. Although uncivil communication or personal attack is not considered vandalism, but in many cases especially in personal attack in derogatory terms of race, sexual orientation, religion, threat of physical attack or legal threat, they editors will be blocked/banned from editing even with one single such attack if they are reported to WP:AIV, almost all editors will be blocked/banned from editing if they have multiple such attack toward an editor. However, being rude or blunt is not considered personal attack as some culture or social upbringing would practice politeness more often than other culture would considered "saying one's thought" is the way to go (such as English vs. the Dutch culture). Other times, some editors are just too sensitive to certain words and would considered constructive criticism is personal attack. To say all that, in regardless of how the editor acted toward us, say being rude or uncivil, we would try to remain cool and not engaging in the same manner.

The answer to the question is we treat IP and registered editor the same and if they act in bad faith on the first account we can either warn them using standard templates or write to them and explain to and "educate" them why their edits are not helpful and link associated guidelines or both (sending warning template and add personal message). If the editors continue the same bad faith edits, we would increase the warning level leading to a block.

2. What can we do to welcome and help the newcomers.? (List down 10 different ways/scenario)

i. Answer: Respond promptly to their inquires. A quick response wins more engagement.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

ii. Answer: Constructive critism. Personalized constructive criticism not only improves editing skills, it increases the chances that an editor will stick around; it can even be taken as praise.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

iii. Answer: Give the newbie models of good editing, such as topical featured articles or good articles.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

iv. Answer: Move, tag, or fix their edits whenever possible rather than rejecting them entirely.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

v. Answer: Be friendly. Civility goes a long way, especially online.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

vi. Answer: Write instructional pages. A good reference guide is beyond helpful.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

vii. Answer: Praise good work.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

viii. Answer: Teach competency. Learning the ropes of Wikipedia is hard, and we can't expect people to be compenent without being taught.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

ix. Answer: Don't Wikipedia:Bite. Be patient and understanding.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

x. Answer: Provide welcome messages with resources to get started as a Wikipedian.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

3. In you own words, provide 10 ways to avoid biting the newcomers.

i. Answer: Show that your understand their perspective (you were once a new editor too) and empathize with them.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

ii. Answer: Stay civil in tone and wording.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

iii. Answer: Stay in good graces by assuming good faith.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

iv. Answer: Don't use too much Wikipedia vernacular as it is often confusing.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

v. Answer: Treat newcomers the way you'd want to be treated as a newcomer.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

vi. Answer: Remember that literally everyone makes mistakes, and it's not the end of the world.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

vii. Answer: Fix mistakes where you can, such as unsigned comments.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

viii. Answer: Avoid being condescending, and never use belitting phrases.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

ix. Answer: Be willing to give friendly and helpful advice.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

x. Answer: Be constructive and respective at all times.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

4. Place 5 different welcome templates on 5 different newcomers. (Pls provide user talk page links)

i. Answer: User talk:SuddenBowsprit - Diff.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

ii. Answer: User talk:2A00:A040:194:D078:3D8B:4EB4:E616:AAC6 - diff

FormalDude read the question again - 5 different welcome messages - see templates' links at the beginning of this assignment.

Answer again: User talk:46.239.2.3 - diff - template: {{welcome-anon-unconstructive}}

Y. Cassiopeia talk 06:50, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

iii. Answer: User talk:Sheesh7284463 - diff

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

iv. Answer: User talk:2.96.83.245 - diff

FormalDude read the question again - 5 different welcome messages - see templates' links at the beginning of this assignment.

Answer again: User talk:Limeysoda - diff - template: {{welcome-cookie}}

Y. Cassiopeia talk 06:50, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

v. Answer: User talk:5.184.76.71 - diff

FormalDude read the question again - 5 different welcome messages - see templates' links at the beginning of this assignment.

Answer again: User talk:Ajeema4 - diff - template: {{welcome-menu}}

Y. Cassiopeia talk 06:50, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

5. List 5 uncivil behaviors and explain how you would deal with them.

i. Answer:

• Bad-faith comments or the assumption of bad faith
• Respond as a concened editor who wants to help. Don't make accusations.

N if the edits is considered bad faith, then it has already had evident that the edit is a vandalism or extremely disruptive one. We should place warning messages on their talk page. Cassiopeia talk 02:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

ii. Answer:

• Personal attack
• Polite warning of the trouble the could get into with the community, offering them an "out".
  

Y if personal attack is in racial, sexual orientation, gender, physical/legal threat in nature, report them to AIV. Cassiopeia talk 02:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

iii. Answer:

• Disrespect/rudeness
• Respond with full kindness. You can't fight fire with fire.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

iv. Answer:

• Lying
• Point out the contradiction politely and ask them if you're possibly misunderstanding them.

Y. Provide hist diff if applicable. Cassiopeia talk

v. Answer:

• Taunting/baiting
• WP:DENY

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

A token of appreciation

We reward Wikipedia editors for their hard work and due diligence by awarding them barnstars as a token of appreciation, encouragement and make its recipient feel good of their contributions. The choice of banstar given should be fair and appropriate, which will help prevent over-use. There are many different type of banstars, kindly read Wikipedia:Barnstars, Wikipedia:Personal user awards

5. Give 5 different banstars to 5 different editor and do provide relevant text as to why you are awarding them. (Pls provide links)

i. Answer: User_talk:Ezlev#A_barnstar_for_you! - diff

For their contributions writing an article.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

ii. Answer: User_talk:Newimpartial#A_barnstar_for_you!

For their helpful and constructive comments in controversial discussions.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

iii. Answer: User_talk:Firefangledfeathers#A_barnstar_for_you! - diff

For their proven ability to resolve conflicts and stay cool.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

iv. Answer: User_talk:Justiyaya#A_barnstar_for_you! - diff

For their outstanding civility.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

v. Answer: User_talk:Sdkb#A_barnstar_for_you! - diff

For their invaluble wisdom and knowledge.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

---

FormalDude See assignment 7 above. Cassiopeia talk 08:23, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

@Cassiopeia: Hope you're doing well! I've completed the assignment. ––FormalDude ^talk 09:41, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

@Cassiopeia: Just wanted to make sure you received my ping. :) ––FormalDude ^talk 23:55, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude I did receive your ping and place it on my 'to do list' and was intended to work on it last weekend but did not get around it. My apologies. Have commented on Q1 and will continue the rest in next two days. Cassiopeia talk 04:57, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude See comments above and pls rework your answers for question 4 (ii), (iv) and (v). Ping me when you have done. Cassiopeia talk 02:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, thanks! I've reanswered those questions. ––FormalDude ^talk 04:00, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude Reviewed and see Assignment 8 below. Cassiopeia talk 06:50, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

---

Tools and help

#	Tools	For / Functions
1	Twinkle	Wikipedia gadget to assist common maintenance tasks
2	Hotcat	Wikipedia gadget to propose existing categories for auto-completion
3	Resource Request	Wikipedia help desk to locate content of printed books or form paywall sites
4	Google translate	Translation
5	Citation Tool for Google Books	Citation tool for Google books
6	Reverse Image Search	Reverse image serach
7	User:FormalDude/CSD log	Your Criteria for speedy deletion log
8	This is your AfD log	Your Article for Deletion log
9	Earwig's Copyvio Detector via web Earwig Copyvio Detector script	Copyvio detector tool
10	CV-revdel	Delete copyrighted content request
11	StubSorter user script.	Adding/removing stub tags
12	Rater user script	Adding, removing, or modifying WikiProject banners, including class and importance assessment
13	StubSorter user script	Adding stub class sorter
14	Shortdesc helper script	Wikipedia gadget - Adding short description in the article
15	Special:NewPagesFeed	Search new articles in Wikipedia
16	Copyvio Check	Displays the % of copyvio in a separate section of the info menu of the NPP toolset.
17	Superlinks	Quickly view pages and information related to the page they are currently viewing or editing without the need to navigate away form current page
18	NPP flowchart	NPP flowchart
19	WP:RX	Source/Paid-wall - Resource Request

---

FormalDude No questions for this assignment. Make sure you have all the tools above. Let me know when you are ready for Assignment 9. Cassiopeia talk 06:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)No questions for this se

@Cassiopeia: Alright, I've installed all of those applicable, except for #5 "Citation tool for Google books". That link does not appear to be working. Also, the resource request is listed twice, at numbers 3 and 19. Thanks! ––FormalDude ^talk 08:25, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude Thank you for informing about #18 and I will look into #5. Will post assignment (9) below. Cassiopeia talk 03:43, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

---

Putting all together -reviewing articles

• Please install COPYVIO check script. This is a script which displays the % of copyvio in a separate section of the info menu of the NPP toolset. After saving, you have to bypass your browser's cache to see the changes - see instruction at Wikipedia:Bypass your cache.

• Please install Superlinks script. This script allows users to quickly view pages and information related to the page they are currently viewing or editing without the need to navigate away from the page or open large numbers of new tabs. After saving, you have to bypass your browser's cache to see the changes - see instruction at Wikipedia:Bypass your cache.

• Bookmark NPP flowchart in your devices.

• Note: quality reviewing is extremely important, please do not sacrifice quality for quantity.

Reviewing articles

Please refer to NPP flowchart and read all the reading material provide from Assignment and tools 1-8 and answer the questions below. Please pick 10 articles from the new pages or draft pages from Special:NewPagesFeed and follow the NPP flowchart and provide the appropriate answer below (pls place N/A if not applicable). Pick articles that have 3-4 sources for the exercises below.

0. Example

1. Article (pls provide link) = Assignment 2 - Sources Q 8 and 9 Q 8 - David Howell Petraeus
2. Article titles (need to change if so state the change) = OK
3. Images copyright = US free image
4. NPOV (if not then state why) =yes
5. COI / PAID (if yes then provide explanation)= no indication
6. COPYVIO (if yes then provide source (URL) = not
7. Article Class = Stub class
8. Short Description = U.S. Army general
9. Categories (3-5) = 1952 births  ; Living people ; Commandants of the United States Army Command
10. Review (Review/AfD/PROD/BLPPROD/R2) = Reviewed
11. Reason (for 10) = = meet GNG and Military history/Notability guide#2
12. WikiProject = Biography, Military history, Espionage, New York (state), Iraq, Afghanistan
13. Sources (see below)

Pls indicate "y" for yes or "n" for no after "ind", "rel" and "sig" (see first example) and give a brief explanation of why you place "y" or "n".

Source assessment table:

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/11/09/david-petraeus-cia-resign-nbc/1695271/	The source is major newspaper	The source is reputable published source	The source discusses the subject directly and in detail	✔ Yes
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2011/09/06/petraeus-sworn-into-cia.cnn?iref=allsearch	CNN is independent of the government.	CNN is generally considered reliable.	CNN shows him taking the oath.	✔ Yes
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/david-petraeus-paula-broadwell_n_2118893	Independent of the government	Is very opinionated	Addresses the topic in detail	✘ No
https://www.geni.com/people/Sixtus-Petraeus/6000000015418360012	The subject isn't connected to the maker of the family tree.	Can't be verified.	? Not sure	✘ No
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2010/05/petraeus-exclusive-201005	Not connected to the subject.	The source is considered reliable.	Talks about the subject in detail.	✔ Yes
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/beyond/interviews/petraeus.html	The subject is talking to the author.	It comes from a reputable news source.	He is the subject of the interview.	✘ No
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/david-petraeus-general-surge-401740.html	The author is not directly connected with the subject.	The source is a news source that has a reputation of being reliable.	The article talks about him in detail.	✔ Yes
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}}.

---

1.

1. Article = Peinaleopolynoe orphanae
2. Article titles = OK
3. Images copyright = N/A
4. NPOV = yes
5. COI / PAID = No indication
6. COPYVIO = No
7. Article Class = Stub
8. Short Descr = Species of Polynoidae discovered in 2020
9. Categories = Annelid stubs, Errantia
10. Review/AfD/PROP/CSD = Reviewed
11. Reason (for 10) = Meets GNG and WP:NSPECIES
12. WikiProject = Biology
13. Sources

Source assessment table:

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1436333	World Register of Marine Species	Used often and considered reliable	Talks about the subject	✔ Yes
https://dive.site/blog/top-marine-species-discovered-2020/	not affiliated with the topic	? appears to be a blog, but cites reputable sources	talks about the subject	? Unknown
				? Unknown
				? 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}}.

Y. A blog is always considered not reliable source. In most cases deep sea creatures / new plants/new bio creatures would have limited amount of sources to be found from the web but would be found from scientific journals. However, in this case we can find some. As a reviewer, with subject that is likely to be notable and luck of existing sources in the article, we will, as good practice, try to find the additional sources and add to the article (NOTE A). I have removed the blog sources and added another source to support the content claimed - see here-1 and additional sources - see here-2. As for the image, we can always go to Wikipedia Commons and check the image source by paste the image name on the search file. For this example and when I checked the sourcce site, I could not find it is for free used or under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 or 4.0 International license. However, it was reviewed by Wiki Commons editor that the image is complied by Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license - see here-3. Cassiopeia talk 00:56, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

---

2.

1. Article = Brandy Donaghy
2. Article titles = OK
3. Images copyright = N/A
4. NPOV = yes
5. COI / PAID = No indication
6. COPYVIO = No
7. Article Class = Stub
8. Short Descr = American politician in Washington
9. Categories = Living people, Washington (state) Democrats, Women state legislators in Washington (state), 21st-century American politicians, 21st-century American women politicians, Members of the Washington House of Representatives, Washington (state) politician stubs
10. Review/AfD/PROP/CSD = Reviewed
11. Reason (for 10) = Meets GNG and NPOLITICS
12. WikiProject = Politics, Biography, Washington
13. Sources

Source assessment table:

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.heraldnet.com/news/lovick-tapped-for-senate-donaghy-to-replace-him-in-house/	Herald News organization is independent	Herald News has a honor code and respects objective journalistic values	Primarily about the article topic	✔ Yes
https://www.heraldnet.com/news/3-challengers-face-long-shot-odds-in-county-council-races/	Herald News organization is independent	Herald News has a honor code and respects objective journalistic values	Talks significantly about the article topic	✔ Yes
				? Unknown
				? 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}}.

Y. (NOTE A). For Wikiproject we always add "WikiProject Biography" if the subject is a person and if the subject is a female we also add "Women" WikiProject. I have added them - see https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Brandy_Donaghy&type=revision&diff=1062205979&oldid=1060935937&diffmode=source here -4]. Cassiopeia talk 01:06, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

---

3.

1. Article = Hyundai MobED
2. Article titles = OK
3. Images copyright = N/A
4. NPOV = Yes
5. COI / PAID = No indication
6. COPYVIO = No
7. Article Class = Stub
8. Short Descr = Mobile robot
9. Categories = Technology, 2021 robots, Hyundai Motor Group
10. Review/AfD/PROP/CSD = Reviewed
11. Reason (for 10) = Meets WP:NVEHICLES
12. WikiProject = Robotics, Korea
13. Sources

Source assessment table:

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://geniushark.com/2021/12/16/hyundais-new-mobed-robot-can-carry-booze-and-babies/	No relation with Hyundai	GeniusShark is generally reliable	Solely about the topic	✔ Yes
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/hyundai-motor-group-reveal-mobile-eccentric-droid-mobed--an-all-new-mobility-platform-for-versatile-applications-301445059.html	Press release	Primary source	Solely about the topic	✘ No
https://valenciacars.blogspot.com/2021/12/hyundai-mobed-plataforma-movilidad.html	Press release	Primary source, hosted on a blog	Solely about the topic	✘ No
http://www.ajudaily.com/view/20211216094743079	No relation with Hyundai	Appears generally reliable, no indication of paid/advertising	Solely about the topic	✔ Yes
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}}.

Y Thank you for adding additional sources. I have removed unreliable sources and unsourced content - see here-5. Cassiopeia talk 01:19, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

---

1. Article = Tales of Courage (film)
2. Article titles = OK
3. Images copyright = N/A
4. NPOV = Yes
5. COI / PAID = No indication
6. COPYVIO = No
7. Article Class = Stub
8. Short Descr = 1986 Indian documentary film
9. Categories = Indian films, 1986 films, Manipuri film, Indian documentaries, Bollywood films
10. Review/AfD/PROP/CSD = Reviewed
11. Reason (for 10) = Meets WP:NFOE criteria 4
12. WikiProject = India, Film
13. Sources

Source assessment table:

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
http://knowyourfilms.com/film/Tales-of-Courage/23258	Doesn't appear to have affiliation	Doesn't appear reliable	Just a listing	✘ No
https://indiancine.ma/ABKD/info	Doesn't appear to have affiliation	No indication of unreliability	Gives a synopsis and details	✔ Yes
http://e-pao.org/erang/Classic/write/Documentary_Films_In_Manipur_1.php	Doesn't appear to have affiliation	Blog	Takes about the topic	✘ No
https://pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=1775822	Affiliated with topic	Primary source	talks about the topic	✘ No
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}}.

Y Most of the sources are not reliable; however I do think there are some local sources (Indian related languages soures) could be found out there. Cassiopeia talk 01:33, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

---

5.

1. Article = Immigration Examinations Fee Account
2. Article titles = OK
3. Images copyright = N/A
4. NPOV = Yes
5. COI / PAID = No indication
6. COPYVIO = No
7. Article Class = C
8. Short Descr = Account in the Treasury of the United States
9. Categories = United States Department of the Treasury
10. Review/AfD/PROP/CSD = Reviewed
11. Reason (for 10) = Meets GNG
12. WikiProject = Numismatics, United States, U.S. government
13. Sources

Source assessment table:

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2001/08/08/01-19875/adjustment-of-certain-fees-of-the-immigration-examinations-fee-account	Not independent but still usable per WP:PRIMARY	Primary source	Talks about the creation of the topic	✔ Yes
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2019-title8/html/USCODE-2019-title8-chap12-subchapII-partIX-sec1356.htm	Not independent but still usable per WP:PRIMARY	Primary source	Covers the topic	✔ Yes
https://www.aila.org/File/Related/20073100c.pdf	Not independent but still usable per WP:PRIMARY	Primary source	covers the topic extensively	✔ Yes
https://ballotpedia.org/Independent_Offices_Appropriations_Act_of_1952	Completely independent.	Although there is no consensus for the reliability of Ballotpedia, this particular source appears reliable in all aspects.	Covers the topic	✔ Yes
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}}.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 01:33, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

---

6.

1. Article = Acrocephalomyia pulchra
2. Article titles = OK
3. Images copyright = N/A
4. NPOV = Yes
5. COI / PAID = No indication
6. COPYVIO = No
7. Article Class = Stub
8. Short Descr = Species of Ropalomera from Brazil
9. Categories = Insect stubs, Diptera of South America
10. Review/AfD/PROP/CSD = Reviewed
11. Reason (for 10) = Meets GNG and WP:NSPECIES
12. WikiProject = Insects, Diptera
13. Sources

Source assessment table:

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/1338053-Acrocephalomyia-pulchra	not affiliated with the topic	inaturalist is reliable	talks about topic	✔ Yes
https://www.biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.4067.1.4	not affiliated with the topic	biotaxa is reliable	talks about topic	✔ Yes
				? Unknown
				? 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}}.

Y although https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/1338053-Acrocephalomyia-pulchra is IRS, there is not information on this page to support the content claim. 01:39, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

---

7.

1. Article = Produce Stakes (USA)
2. Article titles = OK
3. Images copyright = N/A
4. NPOV = Yes
5. COI / PAID = No indication
6. COPYVIO = No
7. Article Class = Start
8. Short Descr = American horse racing event
9. Categories = Discontinued horse races, Brighton Beach Race Course, Horse races in New York (state), Recurring sporting events established in 1902
10. Review/AfD/PROP/CSD = Reviewed
11. Reason (for 10) = Passes WP:SPORTSEVENT and GNG
12. WikiProject = Horse racing, Sports
13. Sources

Source assessment table:

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://drf.uky.edu/catalog/1900s/drf1907092901/drf1907092901_1_7	From a University	Academic writing	Covers the topic	✔ Yes
https://drf.uky.edu/catalog/1900s/drf1908011801/drf1908011801_1_7	From a University	Academic writing	Covers the topic	✔ Yes
https://www.nytimes.com/1911/07/14/archives/race-track-bill-defeated-in-senate-measure-modifying-directors.html	From a reputable newspaper	NYtimes is reliable	Covers the topic in detail	✔ Yes
https://drf.uky.edu/catalog/1910s/drf1910021301/drf1910021301_1_11	From a University	Academic writing	Covers the topic	✔ Yes
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}}.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 01:44, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

---

8.

1. Article = José Cabrinetty
2. Article titles = OK
3. Images copyright = OK, makes use of a public domain image
4. NPOV = Yes
5. COI / PAID = No indication
6. COPYVIO = No
7. Article Class = Start
8. Short Descr = 19th-century Spanish Brigadier
9. Categories = 1823 births, 1873 deaths, Military personnel of the First Carlist War, Spanish military personnel of the Hispano-Moroccan War (1859–60), People from Palma de Mallorca, Spanish military personnel killed in action
10. Review/AfD/PROP/CSD = Reviewed
11. Reason (for 10) = Meets WP:BIO and GNG
12. WikiProject = Spain, Military, Military history
13. Sources

Source assessment table:

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
www.raco.cat/index.php/annalsCER/article/viewFile/225237/333441	from a historian not associated with the subject	appears reliable, is from a university	appears to cover the topic	✔ Yes
https://books.google.cat/books?id=cY3FeeZ-46oC&pg=PA92&dq=batalla+d%27alpens&hl=ca&sa=X&ei=U6b1UNiMOYrB2wXlj4HgBA&ved=0CC4Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=batalla%20d'alpens&f=false	Separate from the topic	No indications of unreliability	appears to cover the topic	✔ Yes
https://web.archive.org/web/20160303172950/http://www.aragirona.cat/noticia/2012/08/15/puigcerda-recupera-lestatua-del-brigadier-i-heroi-josep-cabrinetty	Not affiliated with topic	? unclear what the host website is	appears to cover the topic	? Unknown
				? 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}}.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 01:57, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

---

9.

1. Article = Bernard Schmidt
2. Article titles = OK
3. Images copyright = N/A
4. NPOV = Yes
5. COI / PAID = No indication
6. COPYVIO = No
7. Article Class = Stub
8. Short Descr = Dutch politician
9. Categories = : 21st-century Dutch politicians, Christian Democratic Appeal politicians, 1941 births, 2021 deaths
10. Review/AfD/PROP/CSD = Recommend AfD
11. Reason (for 10) = Does not meet WP:POLITICIAN as they do not have significant coverage in independent sources and they have never held office a state/province-wide level.
12. WikiProject = Politics
13. Sources

Source assessment table:

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://mensenlinq.nl/overlijdensberichten/bernard-schmidt-9223356/	?	?	Unable to translate, but two sources alone are unlikely to qualify as sig cov.	✘ No
https://www.dekrantvantoen.nl//vw/article.do?code=LC&date=20020627&id=LC-20020627-15006&words=	?	?	Unable to translate, but two sources alone are unlikely to qualify as sig cov.	✘ No
				? Unknown
				? 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}}.

Y. www.dekrantvantoen.ni is a digital archive website; however, the article is copy and paste for such we could not even copy and get it translated. The second source is a obituaries web site - for such is not IRS. Subject in this point fails NPOL and GNG. Cassiopeia talk 02:08, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

---

10.

1. Article = Starling (nuclear primary)
2. Article titles = OK
3. Images copyright = N/A
4. NPOV = Yes
5. COI / PAID = No indication
6. COPYVIO = No
7. Article Class = Stub
8. Short Descr = American nuclear bomb
9. Categories = Nuclear warheads of the United States
10. Review/AfD/PROP/CSD = Reviewed
11. Reason (for 10) = Passes GNG
12. WikiProject = Explosives, military history
13. Sources

Source assessment table:

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-0-9791915-1-0	Author is not affiliated with the U.S. government	Chuck Hansen is a Subject-matter expert	Covers topic in detail	✔ Yes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-0-9791915-7-2	Author is not affiliated with the U.S. government	Chuck Hansen is a Subject-matter expert	Covers topic in detail	✔ Yes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-0-9791915-5-8	Author is not affiliated with the U.S. government	Chuck Hansen is a Subject-matter expert	Covers topic in detail	✔ Yes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-0-9791915-6-5	Author is not affiliated with the U.S. government	Chuck Hansen is a Subject-matter expert	Covers topic in detail	✔ Yes
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}}.

Creating article

Please create an article in via Wikipedia:Articles for creation where by the subject is notable, the content adhere to all the requirement and appropriate tagging/labeling/linkings as discussed from Assignment 1-8. Some notable subjects could be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/API Women.

Answer: I created both the draft and the mainspace article Chinese government response to COVID-19 with this and this diff respectively. ––FormalDude ^talk 08:30, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Y. I applaud you creating a subject of that magnitude which so much info and sources needed to be included and subject to many discussions and disagreements, removing and merging of content. You are the third trainee of mine take this program so seriously and creating that of similar complexity article. I am impressed. One thing to note on the talk page discussion regarding WP:PRIMARY - althought primary source would be used "at time" (I would suggest sparingly) if the sources are considered reliable. To say that Chinese government is widely considered not reliable and they also control many major newspaper as oppose to that of German's government. For such I would removed most of the content cited from Chinese govrt for Wikipedia should be supported by secondary IRS. Cassiopeia talk 02:35, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind words. You have been a great instructor to have and it means a lot to hear that from you! I will definetely review sources mentioned in that talk page discussion to ensure they are all IRS, that's good advice. ––FormalDude ^talk 03:00, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

---

FormalDude, See Assignment 9 above. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia talk 03:48, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia I finished the first question, just wanting to make sure I did it correctly before moving on to the rest. Thank you. ––FormalDude ^talk 06:36, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude, yesm, it is correct. Cassiopeia talk 08:39, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia I have completed the assignment. ––FormalDude ^talk 08:38, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude, See comments. Q10 has yet to be reviewed as I am waiting for the source info from RX. I will post Assignment 10 on my next edit. Cassiopeia talk 02:37, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Notes

Assignment 1

• WP:AGF and not WP:BITE -We should always help the new editors who want to provide good contribution and want to improve Wikipedia even at time they might not know the the Wikipedia guidelines

• WP:Notability - In Wikipedia, notability means "worthy to be noted" - it is defined as a topic is "presumably" notable for stand-alone article or list if (1) it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject whee by the sources talk "directly" about the subject in depth and in length and not only passing mentioned and (2) it is not excluded under the What WP:Wikipedia is not policy.

• WP:GNG and SSN - both could be used when reviewing an article.

Assignment 2

• WP:Sources - Sources needed are significant coverage of published Independent / WP:SECONDARY , reliable sources to verify the content claimed where by the sources talk about the subject in lenght and in depth and not only passing mentioned.

Assignment 3

• WP:Content Policy - Article needs to adhere to Wikipedia Content Policy in article article title, WP:Biographies of living persons, image and text (Wikipedia:Image use policy and WP:COPYVIO, WP:NPOV, verifiability

• WP:COPYVIO - Public domain and note proper nouns are not Copyvio

• Wikipedia:Image use policy - check the original source

Assignment 4

• WP:CSD - go through the criteria

• WP:COI / WP:PAID - Self-disclosure by COI/PAID editors is one of the many ways we find out that they are COI/PAID. The different between a COI say an COI editor write about themselves, or friends is that written prose is not that perfect as compared that to a professional writers' (PAID editor). Secondly, if the article is about a company, the prose of the article is written more like a businesslike (business writing). Thirdly, professional paid editor would provide neat citations and only take one or 2 edits to create the article. In addition, professional PAID editors would create multiple different companies article that normal COI editors would not. Do note PAID is a subset of COI and an COI would also a PAID editor such as a small business owner write about their company or a rapper write about their own article in Wikipedia

• G11 (promo) - What constitute a G11? At times it is hard to define. Although if a article is blantantly promote or advertise about the subject then it is a G11. Sometimes, the it is a little subtle and that would be a judgement call. As a rule of thumb, if article about an entertainers (actor/singer/DJ/artist and etc) in dept of how hard they work, how motivated they are, using all the puffery/flowery languages and especially the subject does not meet notability guidelines. For a corporation, we would see they list down all they product/services, their directors/key person in the company, they mission, their client, they are the influencer in their industrial, all the words/phrased to enhance/market the company and no substantial info that is supported by independent reliable sources. If you look at the this version of Zapp Scooters which you tagged G11, I have to agree with the editor who removed the tag that it is not a G11 and unsourced info can be removed.

• G12 (copyvio) - Copyright violation addresses the use of original expression without permission of the holder which is a violation of laws even the credit is given to the source. For articles, the Copyright Law gives the copyright protection to the “original works of authorship fixed in in a tangible medium of expression” in the newspaper, magazine and freelance article at the moment of their creation, for the life of the creator plus 70 years after, and 95 years for corporation publication or 120 years from date of creation, whichever is shorter.

• A7, A9 and A11 - "Claimed of signification" - As long as the content states a claim of significant in regardless there is no source provided or the claim might not be true, then A7/A9/A11 does NOT apply. Example: "John Smiths is the US senator who lives in Texas" or " Let's Jump, Let's Dance is ranked #2 in Billboard chart in October 2019" or "DM7-29 is a U.S. self-propelled artillery gun developed in 2010 capable hitting the target of 500 miles" - all these 3 examples do claim of significant and some of them might not even be true and there have no source, but they do not qualify for A7/A9/A11. The option is either to PROP them or to do a WP:BEFORE or to do a R2, for potential subject, if it has no source or only primary source provided and if they fails the WP:BEFORE then AfD them. A7 would be something like "John Smiths is my high school teacher, who have a lot of knowledge of algebra" or "The Minnesota Valhalla is the heavy metal band from Minnesota. The band makes up of my brother, Alan, my little sister, Mary and two of my mates, Ken and Jesus. We practice every Monday and Friday at our home garage".

Assignment 5

• WP:NPPDRAFT - do so for articles have no sources or sources that are primary/not independent, such as from their home page, user generated sites or sport databases, club home page for sportspersons. If you would find 3 independent, reliable sources to support the notability of the subject, then please do so and add the source in the article and mark reviewed. It can be tempting for new reviewers to overuse this; it should not be used as a substitute for taking an article to AfD.

• PROD - (1) When it does not fall under CSD but not controversial deletion with the notion that it will be deleted if the article is AfDed. (2) We can only PROD the article once thus do check the history page to make sure the article has not been PROD before. (3) If the PROD is removed, do not replace it (4) PROD would last for 7 day start from the date of the nomination and will be either deleted or removed of the tag by an uninvolved admin who decides the outcome of the nomination.

• BLPROD - (1) nominated if only there is no source for article about a living person. (2) BLPPROD can be removed only an reliable is added. (3) Even item 2 has been performed but editor still think it is should be deleted under PROD (1) criteria then a PROD can be tag. (3) if PROD (1) is not applicable and editor could nominate the article for AfD if the subject is not notable.

• AfD - Nominated articles to AfD if the subject is not notable or fall under Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. A WP:BEFORE should be done prior the nominated. If the article states the nationality of the subject and a local name is provided, do search the local name in said country in Google to look for sources if any (2) Reason / justification based on notability guidelines should be address when nominate AfD or participate in a AfD. (3) Do not AfD if the sources are provided but you can locate/view them due to paywall, print book/article to determined the content claimed as per sources. (4) Request paywall article /print book from WP:RX to view the content (make sure you have you email provided in your preferences page, so the RX editors could send you the article via email). (4) You might want to reconsider to AfD an article if the sources of the article would be found mostly in other languages besides English or your languages you comprehend. For example if an article is about a Russian poet or sportman or actors / singer but the subject has not reach worldwide notability/popularity where by most source could not be found in their country reliable newspapers or books other languages but English. I dont often participate/vote for Indian actors as I dont read any Indian languages.

Assignment 6

• Taggaing - sue scripts/tools to tag appropriate cat/wikiproject/subsort/issues in the their respectively fields.

Assignment 7

• Many ways to communicate with the editors - focus on the subject not the ediots. Be civil and helpful always.

While notability is the most important concept for a reviewer, communication is our most important responsibility. Communication takes a few forms for the NPP reviewer:

• Always using clear and helpful edit summaries while patrolling - While using edit summaries is generally good practice, while doing NPP it's important to take it a step further. For instance, a common occurance will be to find an album by a musician with a page, but a particular album doesn't seem to meet any of the criteria of WP:NALBUM. The normal patrol action here is to redirect the album to the page of the artist. An inadequate edit summary would be "redirecting to artist" or some such. I prefer a more complete summary along the lines of "No indication in article of how album is notable per WP:NALBUMS. Redirecting as an WP:ATD."
• Edit summaries are not a replacement, however, for real communication. Depending on context this should either be done on the talk page or the user talk page of the editor. This is especially to be done even if the other editor is only communicating through edit summaries. We have a higher obligation to do it right. Doing this proactively is great. Just as frequently it will be more reactive - for most editors who contact you it will be out of confusion or ignorance. However you will get some angry ones as well. In all cases being the calm professional one in the conversation is vital.
• The final main mode of communication is through the toolset itself. Find a great article? Make sure to leave a comment. See a few articles in a row by a newer user all of which are notable? Leave some wiki love.
• There are a few essential policies and guidelines when it comes to communication. Please read (or re-read) Wikipedia:Assume good faith, WP:BITE, WP:CIVIL, and Wikipedia:Etiquette.

Assignment 8

• Tools - as per listed

Assignment 9

• Reviewing article - Apply what have learnt from Assignment 1-8 when reviewing article.

• Paywall site: If the source is from a paywall site, then see help from WP:RX and you need to forward me the print article once WP:RX send it to you via email.

• Lack of sources : If there is lack of sources, we need to do a WP:BEFORE, then we and add in the sources (at least 3 independent, reliable sources in the article) if we going to mark review.

• Print sources: I do suggest to avoid any print sources for they are hard to located.

• Digital sources of foreign languages: If the sources are digital and in foreign languages, then get it translated.

• Filtering: If you are going to AfD, or PROD then you need to provide reasons of why you are doing do. I would like you to work on different outcomes (some review, some nominated AfD or PROD); however, you still need to do the rest of the requirement such as tagging cats, Wiki Project, subsort (if it is a sub class), send personal messages and etc.

• Work on subject you are familiar with

• For any article without source and you would like to review it and accept the article (meet notability requirements) then you need to find the independent sources (at least 3) which would support the content claimed then place inline citation.

• If you have a hard time to find (say the sources most probably in foreign languages) and it is a potential article, then do a R2.

• For foreign language sources, use google translate, I do that all the time.

• If there is a native name provided in the article, and you know which country the subject is from, then google the native name with the associate country in google search such as a Russian subject then Google search on "native name.ru".

• When reviewing, first pls check if the article fit CSD criteria (do remember to check copyvio), then if the article has no source - do a R2 (I usualy do a R2 for potential article) or tag BLPPROD if it is a BLP or search for the source (I always search for source if I know the subject is notable and add the sources it). For sourced articles, check sources against content claimed. If meet notability guidelines (at least 3 independent, reliable sources needed and check SSN guidelines), then mark review. If the article fails the notability guidelines, then do a PROD if you think if send to AfD will be a definitely delete or nominate AfD for discussion, if you think a discussion should take place.

• Always check all the sources. Any articles that you not sure if it meets notability guidelines, then left them to other patroller.

• When reviewing, make sure take your time - always quality over quantity.

• Creating article - make sure the subject is notable with significant coverage of published Independent / WP:SECONDARY , reliable sources to verify the content claimed where by the sources talk about the subject in length and in depth and not only passing mentioned.

---

FormalDude Hi, This is a reading Assignment 10 and after this is the Final exam. Let me know if you have any questions before I post the final exam questions. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia talk 02:42, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude, When you have finished reading the notes section above and you are ready for the Final Exam, pls let me know. I will review Assignment 9 Q10 when I have the info from RX. Cassiopeia talk 02:50, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia I've finished reading the notes and am ready for the final exam! ––FormalDude ^talk 03:00, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

---

Final Exam

Part 1

1. In your own words, why and how do communicate with the editor and why it is important to WP:AGF and not WP:BITE them?

• Answer: Assuming good faith is a vital policy of Wikipedia that plays right into one of Wikipedia's five main pillars: treat each Wikipedian with respect and civility. AGF is an important part of civility specifically when it comes to new editors because they are not familiar with Wikipedia and have more honest reasons to make mistakes. Jumping on newcomers and making threats or appearing aggressive deters new people from contributing to the Encyclopedia. When dealing with new editors it is important to contextualizing their experience with their actions in order to react in the best possible manner that encourages them to contribute constructively to Wikipedia. When possible, we could send a personal message to explained the problem in hand and provide the Wikipedia guidelines links for the editor so they would understand the applications of the guidelines.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

2. What kind of sources are needed to demonstrate/contribute the notability of the subject? Why it is important?

• Answer: WP:GOLDENRULE. To demonstrate notability, significant coverage is needed in independent, secondary, reliable sources.

Y Note: WP:GOLDENRULE is not Wikipedia policy or guideline but reflect the combination of WP:IS and WP:RS guidelines. Also the source should covered of the subject in detail and at lenght and not only passing mentioned or mere listings are not enough to meet this criterion. This is to ensure that the subject has actually received enough attention to merit a stand-alone article. What we want to avoid is trivial mention like: "Hundreds of people showed up to the concert, including [subject]." Cassiopeia talk 00:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

3.What constitutes a WP:COPYVIO? and why it is not a copyvio even the texts are identical the same as per sources?

• Answer: Any text copied from the sources that are not public domain or without permission or copyright holder, including close paraphrasing. For images, if the image fails to comply with one of the free licenses. It would not be a copyvio if it is public domain or otherwise freely licensed with the permission of the copyright holder.

Y. Also it is not considering copyvio if the the texts are direct quote from the cited source. Cassiopeia talk 00:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

4. What should we do when we encounter WP:COPYVIO article and what should we place on the COPYVIO editor's talk page?

• Answer: Nominate a page for G12 if the content is unsalvageable due to multiple copyright violations. If there's a chance to delete the revisions which violate the copyright and save other content, we request REVDEL. We should place Template:Db-copyvio-notice on their talk page.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

5. What should we do when we encounter WP:PAID article and what should we place on the PAID editor's talk page?

• Answer: Report to WP:COIN if needed. Add Template:subst:Uw-coi to their talk page and and tag COI on the page via twinkle.

Y. I believe you meant {{subst:uw-coi}}. If a PAID article has yet to gone through WP:AfC (Article for creation) process, then we MUST move the page to draft space. PAID article "must" to go through first AFC review then NPP review prior it can be made in main space. Cassiopeia talk 00:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

6. When do we nominated a page for WP:G12 and when do we WP:REVDEL the COPYVIO text?

• Answer: If the content is unsalvageable due to multiple copyright violations versus if there's a chance to delete the revisions which violate the copyright and save other content.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

7. What constitute an article is a WP:PROMO page? and what should do do when we encounter one?

• Answer: Something that is unambiguously promotional. This means it is blunt and obvious advertising. The article should be CSD per WP:G11.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

8. Why do we tag a page? What are the normal tags we place in an article

• Answer: To indicate for editors certain problems that and need to be addressed, and for the readers, to warn them about problematic content. Normal tags include unreliable sources, excessive detail, informal writing, unreferenced, etc.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

9. When do we WP:R2 a page?

• Answer: Cross-namespace redirects from the mainspace to any other category aside of Category:, Template:, Wikipedia:, Help: and Portal.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

10. When do we WP:PROD a page?

• Answer: We propose deletion if the article doesn't meet any of or AfD criteria as it doesn't require discussion.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

11. When do we WP:BLPPROD a page?

• Answer: BLPROD when article has no source.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

12. When do we WP:AfD a page?

• Answer: After completing WP:BEFORE and the article still fails Wikipedia both GNG and SNG/SSG and doesn't fit into CSD, PROD, BLPPROD where the article may be controversial which requires community discussion prior to deletion.

Y. Good. Cassiopeia talk 00:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

13. Why it is important to WP:CSD a page when the article fit the CSD criteria?

• Answer: To prevent unencyclopedic content from staying on Wikipedia.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

14. When do we decide to WP:R2 / WP:PROD / WP:BLPPROD a page when the article has no source in it?

• Answer: After completing a WP:BEFORE. PROD is for when it does not fall under CSD but not controversial deletion with the notion that it will be deleted if the article is AfDed. BLPPROD is nominated only if there is no source in an article about a living person. R2 is for draftification.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

15. In your own words, list 5 things you have learnt from observing and participating in AfD.

• Answer i: It's not a !vote. Consensus is achieved via discussion.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

• Answer ii: Some editors are overly attached to their work, and some do not know Wikipedia's policies, and it's important not to WP:BITE the newcomers.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

• Answer iii: AfD is needed to help keep unencyclopedic information off Wikipedia.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

• Answer iv: Deletion is not cleanup. If the article can be fixed rather than deleted, it should be.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

• Answer v: Consensus can change. What happens in one AfD may not happen in the next one.

Y. Good. Cassiopeia talk 00:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Part 2

Pls read WP:PROMOTION and WP:G11 and provide 5 successful CSD 11 articles you have nominated from Special:NewPagesFeed (New Page Patrol or Article for Creation section). Pls provide the article names and hist diff/links

• Answer i: Roy Schwartz Tichon; diff

Y. Cassiopeia talk 01:09, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

• Answer ii: Jassim abdulaziz; diff

Y. Cassiopeia talk 01:09, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

• Answer iii: Harjot Kamal Singh; diff

Y. Cassiopeia talk 01:09, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

• Answer iv: Bastard Disco; diff

Y. Cassiopeia talk 01:09, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

• Answer v: Acoustic truth; diff

N you moved the page to draft space and then it got deleted via R2 and not a G11 CSD - see here. Cassiopeia talk 01:09, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Part 3

Pls read WP:COPYVIO, WP:REVDEL, WP:COPYPASTE, WP:DCM and WP:G12 and provide 5 successful CSD 12 articles you have nominated from Special:NewPagesFeed (New Page Patrol or Article for Creation section). Pls provide the article names and hist diff and I will check them at your CSD log. You can use Earwig's Copyvio Detector tool to check if an article is in violation of COPYVIO.

• Answer i: Draft:Eugenia Moliner Ferrer; diff

Y. Cassiopeia talk 01:14, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

• Answer ii: Draft:Radio Mate; diff

Y. Cassiopeia talk 01:14, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

• Answer iii: Draft:Sarmal; diff

Y. Cassiopeia talk 01:14, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

• Answer iv: Draft:Indiana Legal Services; diff

Y. Cassiopeia talk 01:14, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

• Answer v: Draft:Avi Goldfarb; diff

Y. Cassiopeia talk 01:14, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Part 4

Pls read and A1-A11 and R2 at WP:CSD and and provide 5 successful "Article CSD" articles (with at least two of them are CSD A7) you have nominated from Special:NewPagesFeed (New Page Patrol "ONLY"). Pls provide the article names and hist diff.

• Answer i: Kardanur no diff as article is deleted

Y I take it as R2 - see here-1 and hist log here-2. Cassiopeia talk 01:44, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

• Answer ii: Working Backwards no diff as article is deleted

Y I take it as R2 - see here-3 and hist log here-4. Cassiopeia talk 01:44, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

• Answer iii: Lalith Jayaweera no diff as article is deleted

Y I take it as R2 - see here-5 and hist log here-6. Cassiopeia talk 01:44, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

• Answer iv: The blogs; diff A7

Y. Cassiopeia talk 01:44, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

• Answer v: Paige (South African Singer) diff A7

Y. Cassiopeia talk 01:44, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Part 5

1. Nominate 2 articles for WP:PROD and state your reasons.

• Answer i: Haitians in Miami; article does not cite any sources.

Y as per hist diff here-7 Page has since redirect to Little Haiti. Cassiopeia talk 02:14, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

• Answer ii: Doofas (1994 Scott Cawthon Game); article does not cite any sources.

Y as per hist diff here-8 and you have redirected the page to Scott Cawthon. Cassiopeia talk 02:14, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

2. Nominate 1 article for WP:BLPROD and state your reasons.

• Answer i: Carlos Rios (musician) No reliable sources at time of PROD.

N there was one source here-9 as per your nomination at that time - see here-10. Cassiopeia talk 02:14, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

3. Pls read WP:R2 and WP:NPPDRAFT and provide 2 successful WP:R2 from Special:NewPagesFeed (New Page Patrol "ONLY"). Pls provide the article names and hist diff.

Answer i: Kardanur moved to Draft:Kardanur

N. R2 needs to be performed by admin or editor who has "move page" right (not the move from Twinkle). Cassiopeia talk 02:14, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

• Answer ii: Working Backwards moved to Draft:Working Backwards

N. R2 needs to be performed by admin or editor who has "move page" right (not the move from Twinkle). Cassiopeia talk 02:14, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Part 6

1. Participate in 5 WP:AFD where by you are the first voter of the discussion. Please provide you reason either to delete, keep, redirect or merge.

• Answer i: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elis Mraz Delete: Fails WP:NMUSIC.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:40, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

• Answer ii: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sheetal Cool Products Limited Delete: No significant coverage in independent reliable sources to demonstrate notability.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:40, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

• Answer iii: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of X-Men (TV series) video releases Delete: Does not meet WP:NLIST.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:40, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

• Answer iv: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Riniki Bhuyan Sarma Keep: Sources appear to meet WP:BASIC. Notability is of course not inherited, but spouses of powerful politicians are often notable for that reason. Plus, there is significant coverage of her outside of her relation to her husband, so it should meet notability on that alone.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:40, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

• Answer v: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sports teams in the Central Pennsylvania Area Redirect to Sports in South Central Pennsylvania: Content is already included with more depth at this article.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:40, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Part 7

Nominate 5 articles for WP:AFD by using WP:Twinkle and provide explanation of your nomination.

• Answer i: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Escaping Dad Does not come close to passing WP:NFILM.
  

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:59, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

• Answer ii: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Angel Digital Pvt. Ltd. Fails WP:ORGIND and WP:SIGCOV.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:59, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

• Answer iii: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AYM Syntex Limited. Sources do not meet WP:ORGIND, topic is therefore not notable.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:59, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

• Answer iv: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sergey Smbatyan. No indication of notability per WP:BASIC or WP:NMUSIC.
  

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:59, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

• Answer v: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/YNW Juvy. Does not meet WP:NBASIC or WP:NMUSIC.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:59, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Part 8

Pls list 10 things needs to be considered/done when reviewing a page.'

• Answer i: Article quality and importance rating.

Y. Article quality is not one of them. It is ok if the article is not well-written written as long as it passes (1) the notability guidelines (including IRS), no copyvio, no promotion in nature or violate any Wikipedia CSD. Cassiopeia talk 02:24, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

• Answer ii: Checking for notability, specifically GNG or SNG.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:24, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

• Answer iii: Short description.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:24, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

• Answer iv: Copyright violation check.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:24, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

• Answer v: Check for compliance with MOS.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:24, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

• Answer vi: Review sources for reliability, significance, and independence.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:24, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

• Answer vii: Check that the article is in english, makes a claim of notability, and is not incoherent.

Y. If you can fix the copy edit, then do so for good will. Cassiopeia talk 02:24, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

• Answer viii: Categorize article.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:24, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

• Answer xi: Make sure article does not exist elsewhere.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:24, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

• Answer x: Does the article have sufficient context?

Y. Cassiopeia talk 02:24, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Part 9

Pls follow the NPP flowchart and read all the reading material provide from Assignment and tools 1-8 and answer the questions below. Please pick 5 articles that meet the notability guidelines (no PROD/BLPPROD/R2/AfD/CSD) from the new pages from Special:NewPagesFeed and follow the NPP flowchart and provide the appropriate answer below (pls place N/A if not applicable). Pick articles that have 3-4 sources for the exercises below. (pls provide link and hist diff)

1

1.

1. Article = Irfan Jauhari
2. Article titles = OK
3. Images copyright = N/A
4. NPOV = Yes
5. COI / PAID = No indication
6. COPYVIO = No
7. Article Class = C
8. Short Descr = Indonesian footballer
9. Categories = Living people, 2001 births, Indonesian footballers, Persis Solo players, Persija Jakarta players, Bali United F.C. players
10. Review/AfD/PROP/CSD = Reviewed
11. Reason (for 10) = Meets WP:NFOOTBALL criteria #1 and #2.
12. WikiProject = BLP, Football, Athletics
13. Sources

Source assessment table:

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://bola.kompas.com/read/2022/01/06/22294858/hasil-psis-vs-persija-marko-simic-cetak-dwigol-macan-kemayoran-menang-2-1?page=all	Kompas is an established news organization with no conflict	Established news organization with editorial standards	No mention aside from a statistic	✘ No
https://amp.kompas.com/sports/read/2020/09/05/23485148/hasil-timnas-u19-indonesia-vs-bulgaria-kekalahan-telak-untuk-laga-perdana	Kompas is an established news organization with no conflict	Established news organization with editorial standards	Only one mention of Jauhari.	✘ No
https://amp.kompas.com/bola/read/2020/09/11/22273188/hasil-timnas-u19-indonesia-vs-arab-saudi-garuda-muda-apes-3-kali-dihukum-penalti	Kompas is an established news organization with no conflict	Established news organization with editorial standards	Talks about Jauhari: "Meanwhile, one goal for Garuda Muda was recorded by Irfan Jauhari in the 45th minute."	✔ Yes
https://www.cnnindonesia.com/olahraga/20210929112734-142-700937/cedera-ligamen-irfan-jauhari-absen-2-pekan/amp	CNN is an established news org w/ no conflict	CNN is reliable	Covers Jauhari.	✔ Yes
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}}.

Y - Talk page - when the article is a Biography - we add Wiki Project Biography and also fill the living= yes/no box and in this case we also add extra parameter on "ports-priority=Low ; sports-work-group=yes.

Also we do add country where the subject is from and "Athletics" is for persons who compete in "track and fields". The article is considered start page. - see my edits here - here. Cassiopeia talk 00:23, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

2

2.

1. Article = Murder of Libby Squire
2. Article titles = OK
3. Images copyright = N/A
4. NPOV = Yes
5. COI / PAID = No indication
6. COPYVIO = None
7. Article Class = Stub
8. Short Descr = Killing of student in Hull, UK
9. Categories = Crime stubs, English history stubs, 21st century in Kingston upon Hull, 2019 murders in the United Kingdom, Rape in the United Kingdom
10. Review/AfD/PROP/CSD = Reviewed
11. Reason (for 10) = Per WP:NCRIME, very likely to be notable due to meeting GNG and having national/international coverage.
12. WikiProject = Crime, European history
13. Sources

Source assessment table:

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/11/man-pawel-relowicz-found-guilty-hull-student-libby-squire	The Guardian is an independent org	The Guardian is reliable	Highly comparable in scope	✔ Yes
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-humber-56042200	BBC is an independent org	BBC is reliable	Covers the topic in detail	✔ Yes
https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/crime/pawel-relowicz-sentenced-life-prison-minimum-27-years-rape-and-murder-libby-squire-3133308	Yorkshire Post is an independent org	Yorkshire Post is reliable with editorial standards	Source is corroborating of article content	✔ Yes
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/12/libby-squire-murderer-jailed-pawel-relowicz	The Guardian is an independent org	The Guardian is reliable	Talks about the Squire murder and confirms article content	✔ Yes
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}}.

Y. WikiProject: Should not be "European history" - see other Wiki Project for this article - see here. Cassiopeia talk 00:23, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

3

3.

1. Article = Architecture of Spokane, Washington
2. Article titles = OK
3. Images copyright = All fairly licensed
4. NPOV = Yes
5. COI / PAID = No indication
6. COPYVIO = No
7. Article Class = C
8. Short Descr = Overview of the architecture in Spokane, Washington
9. Categories = Architecture in the United States by city, Architecture in Washington (state)
10. Review/AfD/PROP/CSD = Reviewed
11. Reason (for 10) = Passes GNG
12. WikiProject = Architecture, USA
13. Sources

Source assessment table:

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Wang, David (2003). ISBN 978-0-910055-85-7. OCLC 51306066.	From Eastern Washington University Press	passes WP:RS	source has same/similar scope as article	✔ Yes
Matthews, Henry (1998). ISBN 978-0-295-98766-8. OCLC 38536054.	From Eastern Washington University Press	passes WP:RS	source has same scope as article	✔ Yes
Creighton, Jeff (2013). ISBN 978-0-7385-9635-8.	From Arcadia Publishing.	passes WP:RS	Sources covers bridges in Spokane	✔ Yes
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}}.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:53, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

4

4.

1. Article = 2023 Nigerian presidential election
2. Article titles = OK
3. Images copyright = N/A
4. NPOV = Yes
5. COI / PAID = No indication
6. COPYVIO = No
7. Article Class = Start
8. Short Descr = 2023 presidential election in Nigeria
9. Categories = Presidential elections in Nigeria, 2023 elections in Nigeria, 2023 Nigerian general election
10. Review/AfD/PROP/CSD = Reviewed
11. Reason (for 10) = Meets WP:NEVENT and GNG
12. WikiProject = Nigeria, Politics
13. Sources

Source assessment table:

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://guardian.ng/news/2023-okorocha-hints-on-contesting-for-president/	The Guardian is independent	The Guardian is reliable in this instance	about potential nominees	✔ Yes
https://punchng.com/2023-some-apc-members-uncomfortable-with-fayemis-rising-profile-says-ekiti-govt/	No conflict	The Punch is reliable	covers topic	✔ Yes
https://www.vanguardngr.com/2021/09/2023-presidency-delta-group-rallies-support-for-sule-lamido/	no conflict	Vanguard is reliable	covers topic	✔ Yes
https://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/headlines/492320-just-in-court-okays-pdp-convention-dismisses-secondus-suit.html	no conflict	Premium Times is reliable	covers topic	✔ Yes
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}}.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 01:16, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

5

5.

1. Article = Raffaele A. Calogero
2. Article titles = OK
3. Images copyright = N/A
4. NPOV = Yes
5. COI / PAID = Possible
6. COPYVIO = No
7. Article Class = Start
8. Short Descr = Professor
9. Categories = Living people, Professors
10. Review/AfD/PROP/CSD = AfD
11. Reason (for 10) = Does not meet WP:NPROF
12. WikiProject = Italy
13. Sources

Source assessment table:

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://jasn.asnjournals.org/content/20/5/1053	WP:PRIMARY	academic journal	Only mentions the work of the article subject	✘ No
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17536014/	WP:PRIMARY	academic journal	Only mentions the work of the article subject	✘ No
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2019.00446/full	WP:PRIMARY	academic journal	Only mentions the work of the article subject	✘ No
https://www.oxfordglobal.co.uk/spatial-biology-us/speakers/raffaele-calogero/	Speaker profile, likely COI	No editorial standards, paid partnership	Mentions biographical details of the article subject	✘ No
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}}.

N. The article was deleted because the creator of the article was a sock - see her-1 and here-2 ; as all your access mention was correct but the AfD as I believe the subject pass WP:NPROF #1 as per Google scholar - see here-3 and the AfD was a keep - see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raffaele A. Calogero. Cassiopeia talk 01:27, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Part 10

Creating article

Please create an article in via Wikipedia:Articles for creation where by the subject is notable, the content adhere to all the requirement and appropriate tagging/labeling/linking as discussed from Assignment 1-8. Some notable subjects could be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/API Women.

Answer: Draft:Puppet (song)

N. See WP:NSONG criteria. The sources do indicated about the song, but not mainly about the song but part of Igor album or the subject or link to West. I have redirected it to Igor (album). Cassiopeia talk 02:47, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

@Cassiopeia: It has been listed on national and international charts, and it won a Grammy. There also is significant coverage of the song in reliable sources, every source should mention the song at least once and gives details or analysis about it. ––FormalDude talk 03:08, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

FormalDude The album, Igor, did won a Grammy but not the song, unless I have missed it in the content, if so, pls let me know and provide me the source. The sources needs to be "mainly" (sorry not merely as I have previously stated (typo)) talking about the song but not as part of the review of the album or part of the subject or just link to West. Lastly the song has not reach the top 3 in any charts which you have mentioned and cited in the article. Cassiopeia talk 03:42, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

@Cassiopeia: I would imagine that songs from a Grammy Album of the Year are notable. That should qualify as a significant award or honor. It also has been ranked on national or significant music or sales charts. And I'm not sure what you're talking about lastly, the article never claimed the song reached top 3 in any charts. ––FormalDude talk 07:04, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

FormalDude Sorry for not being clear. There are WP:NALBUMS and WP:NSONG SNG. The Igor album is notable as the album won the Grammy award but the songs in the album do not inherently notable because the album is notable. Same not all royal family members are notable even thought their parents/spouses are notable in Wikipedia. For a single to be notable - the criteria is WP:NSONG and the song needs to be in at least need to be in top 3 of reputable chart ranking and this song didnt make the cut. (pls refer to Assignment 2 question 18 "Can't Stop This Thing We Started" song by Byran Adam - it was ranked 2nd position in Billboard (US) and other song charts. The song also fails GNG as all the sources do not directly talk about the song in depth and in length but the song is merely passing mentioned in few sentences or only 1 paragraph. Hope this clear the confusion. Cassiopeia talk 08:29, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

@Cassiopeia: I'm not seeing anywhere in the WP:NSONG criteria that it needs to be in at least top 3 of reputable chart rankings. I still think there is enough verifiable material to warrant a reasonably detailed article, as stated at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Songs#Notability. ––FormalDude talk 09:19, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

FormalDude It doesn't state the position but no ranking on the top would not be passing NSONG. Cassiopeia talk

Cassiopeia If that's not part of the guideline, I'm not sure why you're mentioning it. I'd prefer if you reverted the redirect and instead AfD'd the article. ––FormalDude talk 02:24, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

FormalDude The song is not on the top ranked of any chart. I know you are sentiment of this article because 1. you wrote it and you want it to be in Wikipedia (2) you like the singer as you have been to his concert where you have uploaded some of the concert photos in Common. To be a reviewer, we can be emotional and try to get the page passes because we have emotional attachment or certain inclination, if you do that you and get a page passes when it fails the notability guidelines because of emotional inclination then you will strip of user right even you have been a reviewer for a long time. And pls read NSONG again, if a song is not notable then it should be redirect to either the album of singer/band if there is a page of such. An album is notable doest not mean every song in the album is notable, a song charted in 20-100 position is not notable. Lastly, if you dont trust me then why you participate and join the program under me or you would like to to stop reviewing the remaining of the final exam and left the program in this stage. Cassiopeia talk 03:09, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Cassiopeia I've never been to a concert (though I would like to), those photos were taken by others who had licensed them for reuse. Nevertheless I admit I do like the artist, and that may make me somewhat biased. But many editors (even admins) are successful in editing articles for which they are a fan of the topic/subject. All I'm stating here is that I think the notability is questionable, and deserves discussion at AfD as to whether to redirect or keep. That is because I don't understand how you are determining the songs notability based on being in the top charts alone, because that's not mentioned in NSONG. NSONG says that all the song has to do is chart, period, meaning in the top 100. I do see that some sources are mainly about the album, but there are several sources that are mainly about the song. Lastly, I don't blindly trust anything or anyone. I obviously respect you as a teacher and have learned a lot from you. But if something does not make sense to me I can't pretend it does. I would like to continue the program of course but I can't accept an answer that doesn't exist in the guidelines. ––FormalDude talk 03:35, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

FormalDude Because I have seen many times songs ranked as such were deleted. If you dont accept then let it be as I have no use here to guide you here onward. Cassiopeia talk 03:46, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Cassiopeia If that is the case, and this is a consensus about notability for songs, I can accept that. I put a lot of work into my exam so I would like it to be reviewed please. ––FormalDude talk 03:57, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

FormalDude I understand you and all other participants put a lot of effort on the program and so do I to review them. If you want you can create another new article and make sure it either pass 100% GNG or SNG (it will be worth 5 points instead of 10 points since this is the second attempt). Cassiopeia talk 04:15, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Cassiopeia Can I submit Draft:Sajid Mir (alleged terrorist). I did not technically create the draft, but I am responsible for the majority of the content. ––FormalDude talk 04:33, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

FormalDude Unfortunately not. You need to be the one who create the article and the content in start class. I would suggest you work the new article in "Notepad" and place the source in there and cite them when you move it to draft article. Take your time to find the subject and write the article. I cant review some of the sections for a few weeks as I need to wait for them (AfD) to be closed prior review them. Cassiopeia talk 04:39, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Cassiopeia: I will submit Mycena roseoflava. ––FormalDude talk 08:03, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

FormalDude the article is a sub class. It needs to expand to a start class or submit another new article. Cassiopeia talk 08:14, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Cassiopeia I've expanded the article as much as possible. ––FormalDude talk 20:39, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Cassiopeia Is Mycena roseoflava suitable as start class now? If not I have another article I can submit instead. ––FormalDude talk 14:26, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

• Mycena roseoflava

Y. Cassiopeia <span style="border-radius:8em;paddi

FormalDude Part 10 question is actually worth 5 points and not 10 (my mistakes) so this answer is marked 2.5 out of 5 points. 02:01, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

---

FormalDude See final exam above. All the best! Cassiopeia talk 03:13, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

@Cassiopeia: I'm happy to let you know I've finished the exam! ––FormalDude talk 12:07, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

---

Completion

Congratulations from both myself and all of the instructors at the New pages patrol School on your successful completion of my NPPSCHOOL instruction! You have now graduated from the New pages patrol School and completed your final exam with 95.5%. Well done!

As a graduate you are entitled to display the following userbox (make sure you replace your enrollee userbox) as well as the graduation message posted on your talk page (this can be treated the same as a barnstar).

{{User NPPSCHOOL/Graduate|graduate}}:

This user is an NPP SCHOOL graduate.

FormalDude It's been a real pleasure to work with you over the past few months. I hope you gained something from this course, and if you have any questions, do drop a message on my talk page. Best of luck, and thank you so much for your willingness to help Wikipedia in this role Cassiopeia talk 02:05, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, @Cassiopeia, you've been a great mentor. I have learned a lot from you and greatly appreciate your guidance throughout the course. If it's okay with you, I'd like to keep this page for reference. And I would love if we could continue working together as I start the NPP role–is it alright if I come to you with questions every now and again? ––FormalDude talk 02:12, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

FormalDude Sorry for taking a little longer than I would like to to finish the final exam review. You are "always" welcome on my talk page if you have any questions regarding reviewing article or any topics you need assistance of. (note: new page and AfC (article for creation) reviewing is a little different even both share the same Wikipedia guidance), if you are a AfC reviewer and earn the NPP reviewer right and would like to know the different, then let me know for I can create sub page to differential the two). I thank you for taking up this program and your hard work and we would have another NPP reviewer in the future at hand. Be well and be safe. Cassiopeia talk 02:26, 24 February 2022 (UTC)