User:Cassiopeia/NPPSchool/Nearlyevil665

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: Excluding a small subset of users whose sole intentions are to vandalize or troll, the absolute majority of new editors on Wikipedia are driven by the motivation to contribute something that they consider to be meaningful and helpful to the purposes of building an online encyclopedia. Wikipedia has a myriad of guidelines and rules, which even seasoned editors might find hard navigating or interpreting. It is thus not reasonable to expect editors to know the ins and outs of Wikipedia to the point of perfection, especially new users who might be genuinely misinformed about how Wikipedia works. Bearing this in mind, the logical approach would be that of mentorship and guidance of new editors, rather than assuming malfeasance as a knee-jerk reaction and potentially discouraging said new user from ever making another (proper) edit. nearlyevil665 08:52, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Y When it comes to new editors, assuming good faith and civility are especially important. Newcomers often make mistakes unknowingly for for the might not be familiar with Wikipedia's guidelines. If one were to criticise them harshly ('bite'), they might feel that their contribution to the project is not welcome and would be scared them away from Wikipedia, instead we could help them correct their mistakesin a constructive and beginner-friendly manner. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

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

Answer: Notability is defined by the topic being covered in multiple reliable sources that are independent of the subject. The coverage should not be mere passing mentions and should instead constitute to what could be generally interpreted as substantial coverage of the subject in question. There exists subject-specific notability guidelines for defining notability that are specific to a certain field. These offer additional clarification as to what scope of coverage or achievements could be considered significant enough to assume notability for a specific field, such as that for academics. nearlyevil665 08:52, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

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 of 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) 02:14, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

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

Answer: No. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia for notable events, persons, organizations, concepts, ideas, etc. It's not an online DIY repository as much as it is not a recipe website. nearlyevil665 08:52, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Y Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a how to manual guide - see WP:NOTHOWTO. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 20 April 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: GNG is applied across all articles regardless of the subject. SNGs on the other hand spell out additional clarifications on establishing verifiability of sources and notability of topics for specific subject fields. As these two complement each other I would use both GNG and SNG, if the latter were available for that specific field of course. nearlyevil665 16:11, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Y Both can be used when patrolling; however, SNG/SSG does not superseded GNG but those subject falls under SNG/SSG (sport specific guidelines) but fails to meet the guidelines usually do not survive in article for deletion, unless passes a strong GNG guidelines. Example: certain subjects would not meet GNG due to the fact that no article talk about them directly in length and in dept 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:NCORP and WP:NPOL specify a very strict set of source criteria and requirements respectively. (We will discuss AfD in later assignments). Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 20 April 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: The venue for holding the Olympics is generally known for eight years in advance and there would be myriad of sources to draw from to create the article. Regardless, the subject is definitely notable as per Wikipedia:Notability (sports) and (probably) Wikipedia:EVENTCRIT too (namely Point 1 and 2 of the inclusion criteria). nearlyevil665 16:11, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Y, Very good. If we are familiar with the subject and no sources are provide, then as a good practice, we look for the sources and add into the article and mark the article as review. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 20 April 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 2019 start up software company , specializing in data mining, has just received a USD 200K investor fund.

Answer: Fail of Wikipedia:ORGCRITE as this would constitute only trivial coverage. nearlyevil665 16:11, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Y. Fails all WP:NCORP criteria.

Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

7. Nascimento Ferreira who is a Ultimate Fighting Championships fighters with the undefeated mixed martial arts record of 8-0.

Answer: Pass! I learned Wikipedia:NMMA the hard way! The guide states that over three fights in a top-tier MMA organization, such as the UFC, is enough to presume notability for a subject. nearlyevil665 16:11, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

N, the subject has 2 fights in UFC as per today. Dana White contender series and the lead up to the final of TUF (The Final of TUF are scheduled in normal UFC event) are not considered UFC event. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 20 April 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: Fail of WP:NFF if there are no reliable sources that confirm that principal photography had commenced. Pass of WP:NFF if there are reliable sources that attest that the production itself is notable as per WP:GNG. nearlyevil665 17:10, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Y The subject is not notable under (1) WP:NFF (2) because as of today, April 20, 2021, the film is not yet in production. WP:NFF states that films that are not confirmed to be in principal photography should not have their own articles. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 20 April 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: Pass of WP:POLITICIAN as it states candidates for political office can be notable if they meet WP:GNG. Notability should be met provided the candidate received significant coverage in multiple reliable sources. nearlyevil665 17:10, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

N If you read the WP:NPOL guidelines (see below), then you will notice the subject does not pass NPOL. First of all, the newspapers are local and not national. Subject is currently hold any political position or he has won the position he "is running" as the election is held in November 2021, unless subject is pass in other means as pre GNG.

• Politicians and judges who have held international, national, or sub-national (e.g., province- or state-wide) office, or have been members of legislative bodies at those levels. This also applies to people who have been elected to such offices but have not yet assumed them.

• Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage.

Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

10. A singer who self produced his first album in May 2019 and his songs are listed in Spotify.

Answer: Fail of WP:SINGER. Irrelevant whether the album was self-produced or what online streaming platform the album is available on. What matters are the criteria underlined in WP:SINGER, none of which is met by being listed on Spotify or self-producing an album. nearlyevil665 17:10, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 20 April 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: NACADEMIC#1 as the subject is an academic with demonstrable significant impact in their field. Most likely NACADEMIC#8 as well if the Journal of Economic Psychology qualifies as a well-established academic journal. nearlyevil665 17:10, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Y subject passedWP:NPROF

1. 1 for [1] for being highly cited]
2. 5, His academic position as the NOMIS Professor for Decision and Neuroeconomics Theory is a named, endowed position
3. 8 chief editor of Journal of Economic Psychology [2].

Cassiopeia^(talk)

12. Alistair Overeem

Answer: Passes all 3 criteria of WP:NMMA as he has fought more than three fights in the UFC, has fought for the UFC Heavyweight title and was ranked #2 Heavyweight in 2017. nearlyevil665 17:10, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Y. Some subjects do pass more than on SSG and Overeem is one of them. 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) 02:14, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

13. Jennifer Lopez

Answer: Blatant pass of WP:SINGER#1 as she has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician. Moreover, pass of SINGER#2 and SINGER#3 as she has multiple albums that have been on the national music charts and certified gold or higher. Also a pass of flying colors of SINGER#8 as she has received numerous reputable awards and nominations. If I dug around deeper I'm much I could find evidence of SINGER#11 and SINGER#12 too. nearlyevil665 17:10, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Y. Passes

WP:COMPOSER #1, Credit for writing and #5, Listed as a major influence.

WP:ENT #1, #2, #3 (all)

WP:CREATIVE #3, Major role in …co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work (e.g., film).

Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

14. Three Mile Island accident

Answer: WP:LASTING as the radioactive fallout is considered as one of the most significant in U.S. commercial nuclear power plant history. Furthermore, WP:EVENTCRIT#1 and WP:EVENTCRIT#2 as it had enduring historical significance, met WP:GNG and had widespread (national or international) impact in the sense of fueling anti-nuclear sentiment both locally and worldwide. nearlyevil665 17:10, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Y. Passes

WP:LASTING - Enduring historical significance/lasting effect

WP:GEOSCOPE- Widespread impact

WP:COVERAGE- WP:DEPTH Analysis that puts event in context; WP:PERSISTENCE Coverage beyond news cycle;

WP:DIVERSE - Wide-ranging reporting

Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

15. Persepolis

Answer: WP:GEOFEAT as the ancient city is a UNESCO World Heritage Site. nearlyevil665 17:10, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Y. Passes

WP:GEOFEAT - Artificial feature officially assigned the status of cultural heritage or national heritage.

WP:GEOLAND - “Even abandon places can be notable because notability encompassed their entire history” as a capital of Achaemenid Empire. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

---

Nearlyevil665 Good day. See assignment 1 above. For all the assignments, pls provide hist diffs (as per diffs instruction here) of the articles, reverts, edits, reports, results of the reports, guidelines, talk page messages, and any hist diff that is applicable. Pls provide guidelines where applicable and justify/explain in details of your application or analysis. Pls ping me if you need assistance (here in this program page at the communication section of every assignment). Please book mark this page and ping me when you have finished the assignment for me to review. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:58, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Nearlyevil665 Pls note, do provide the guidelines which you answers are based on. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:00, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA Hello, I have completed the assignment. Please feel free to review at your earliest convenience. Thank you! nearlyevil665 17:12, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Nearlyevil665 See the comments above. Let me know if you have any questions or you are ready to move on to next assignment. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA All understood. I'm ready to move onto the next one. nearlyevil665 08:45, 20 April 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	A reliable source is one that is independent from the subject and published in a setting where there the editorial oversight or other form of peer review is sufficient for the source to be considered as reliable.	The Guardian newspaper The Daily Telegraph (UK) The Hill Los Angeles Times National Geographic	Y. (3) Sources that published by a reliable author and undergone a thorough process of factchecking (2) of a longstanding reputation for fact-checking and accuracy news sites (3) scholarship which are subject to peer-review before publication. Cassiopeia(talk) 08:31, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
User generated sources	User-generated sources are as the name suggests sources where the content is produced by individual users or groups with little or virtually no proper editorial oversight, or where the information provided is not static such as on Wikipedia where even properly sourced content can be changed at any instance.	Youtube IMDB Any blog Flickr Wikipedia	Y. Also include all the social media sources Cassiopeia(talk) 08:31, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
Non Independent source	A non-independent source is one that is connected to the subject, is self-published and created to advance the subject's interests.	Company's website Press releases Subject's social network Autobiography Statements by politicians	Y. non indpedent sources include those from the subject marketing company, their company/who they work for/ their website/social media etc. Cassiopeia(talk) 08:31, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

---

2.

Type	Explanation	Sources (15 Primary ; 5 Secondary ; 5 Tertiary)	Comment by Cass
Primary	Primary sources are ones produced by the subject itself and are usually written at the time of the event being covered.	(example) scientific journal articles reporting experimental research results Diary Memoir Auto-biography MMA fight stats Company statements Interviews Speeches Letters Government statements Eyewitness accounts Census data Personal websites Personal blogs Any first-hand data	Y. Primary source not only produce by the subjects themselves, but also include eyewitness accounts, creative texts, experiment results and etc where by the sources provide the first-hand information on a topic. Cassiopeia(talk) 08:31, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
Secondary	A secondary source is one that covers a primary source and often includes an analysis or evaluation of the information originally presented in the primary source.	(example) newspaper Scientific journals (analyzing already existing data) Newspapers Book reviews Thesis	Y. Note thesis - the sources need to be not from the ordinary research or from the author who is the subject matter of the topic. Cassiopeia(talk) 08:31, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
Tertiary	A tertiary source is one that compiles information from both primary and secondary sources, such as in an encyclopedia, and primarily serves to present an overview of information rather than analysis or evaluation.	(example) encyclopedias Wikipedia Bibliographies School or university textbooks Manuals	Y. (Wikipedia) only refer to the article where by the sources are not primary. Cassiopeia(talk) 08:31, 23 April 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	Commentarii de Bello Gallico	Roman philosopher commenting on Caesar's words	An encyclopedic article summarizing both Caesar's words and secondary sources about those words	Y. Cassiopeia(talk) 08:31, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
Science	New COVID-19 vaccine specifics published by the manufacturer	A peer-reviewed scientific journal reviewing the specifics of the vaccine	Encyclopedic article about the vaccine	Y. Cassiopeia(talk) 08:31, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
Athletes	Usman Nurmagomedov's stats on sherdog	A sports magazine writing about Usman's performance	Article about Usman on Wikipedia	(yellow tick}}. We consider Sherdog a secondary source for Sherdog is not a promoter but a mma sites. However, it the info is from the subject web page then that is considered primary source. Cassiopeia(talk) 08:31, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

---

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

Answer: Unless there is a way to verify the content anyone will be able to place anything they desire on Wikipedia and editors won't have any mechanism of verifying if what was written actually has proper sources (ones that are reliable, non-affiliated to the subject) to back up what is being written.

Y Good. Verification is the key. Content needs to verifiable not because it is the facts or true - see WP:But it's true!. If source indicated XXX is from Jamaica but the fact XXX is from Cuba, we put XXX is from Jamaica in article. We will correct the info when the sources (not need to be the same source) correct itself. For example Alexander the Great - How he die is based on which sources you read, from poising, to malaria and typhoid fever to infectious (meningitis) to acute pancreatitis and etc. Cassiopeia^(talk) 08:31, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

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

Answer: We cannot, as anyone can edit Wikipedia at any time (barring certain exceptions such as semi-protected pages that only certain editors can edit), therefore there is no guarantee that the information is reliable and verified. Instead of using Wikipedia as a source we could look at the references for Wikipedia's article and determine their reliability and use them as sources instead.

Y. We can not be the sources as the content of Wikipedia is supported by "other sources" but it is also because WP:CIRCULAR. Wikipedia is a online knowledge sharing platform. Readers should check the sources in the article and verify/read the info themselves. Cassiopeia^(talk) 08:31, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

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

Answer: For example the autobiography Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance is reliable but as it was written by the subject itself, it is considered non-independent.

Y you didnt answer by the the source is reliable. It is considered reliable because the publisher is considered reliable. Cassiopeia^(talk) 08:31, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

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

Answer: Someone who runs a self-published MMA blog and reports on fights would be considered independent as they have no financial stake or other sort of vested interest in the fight, but would be considered unreliable as they run a user-generated platform with no editorial oversight or peer-review.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 08:31, 23 April 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/	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	Reputable news agency	As per WP:RSP is reliable	Significant coverage about subject	✔ Yes
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/david-petraeus-paula-broadwell_n_2118893	Not connected to subject	As per WP:RSP there is no reliability of political matters printed in Huff Post, and I'd be careful to say this is a reliable source for any non-trivial content	Significant coverage of the subject	✘ No
https://www.geni.com/people/Sixtus-Petraeus/6000000015418360012	Not connected to subject	Is a wiki, so user-generated	This is a wiki about his father	✘ No
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2010/05/petraeus-exclusive-201005	Not connected to subject, is a major news outlet	As per WP:RSP	Significant coverage	✔ Yes
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/beyond/interviews/petraeus.html	This is an interview so not independent, so qualifies as a primary source	PBS would itself would probably be reliable but this is just an interview	Significant in-depth interview	✘ No
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/david-petraeus-general-surge-401740.html	Not connected to subject	As per WP:RSP	Significant coverage	✔ 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) 08:31, 23 April 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: Passes Wikipedia:POLITICIAN as per his position as Head of CIA. Also not sure but maybe WP:ANYBIO#1 for one of his medals, such as the Defense Distinguished Service Medal.

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) 08:31, 23 April 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/	User-generated site, self-published	The instagram page belongs to the subject, so she or her PR firm could write anything they wish, without any fact-checking	There is no information here beyond the subject's videos and photos with small descriptions	✘ No
https://www.latimes.com/sports/more/la-sp-us-open-hingis-20170910-story.html	Newspaper with proper editorial oversight, mentioned in WP:RSP	Reliable as per WP:RSP	Significant coverage of the subject and not mere passing mentions	✔ Yes
	Is not connected to the subject	Checked and the author and the publisher seem to be reliable	Just a passing mention of the subject	✘ No
https://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/id/21171438/tennis-another-twist-bizarre-career-martina-hingis	Reputable media with proper editorial oversight	Reliable	Covers the subject in-depth	✔ Yes
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2007/nov/01/tennis	Reputable newspaper=	As per WP:RSP is reliable	Subject is covered significantly	✔ 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

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: The assessment table was already filled in for this one. Not sure if this was deliberate. Either way, I added the justification and the subject passes WP:NTENNIS#3 and WP:NTENNIS#5 for competing in the main draw in one of the highest-level professional tournaments and winning 5 Grand Slams.

{{tick} Subject pass WP:NTENNIS SSN (sport specific notability) - Full content from the article Martina Hingis would pass all the WP:NTENNIS criteria. Cassiopeia^(talk) 08:31, 23 April 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/	The source is major newspaper	The source is reputable published source	The source discusses the subject directly and in detail	✔ Yes
https://franklloydwright.org/work/	This is a foundation that is connected to the subject and hence cannot be independent.	Not reliable as there is vested interested for the information to be presented in a subjective way.	As his foundation, this website naturally covers detailed information about the subject.	✘ No
https://web.archive.org/web/20080302053743/http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/jul2004/nf20040728_3153_db078.htm	Reputable major media outlet	As per WP:RSP is reliable	Detailed coverage of subject	✔ Yes
https://books.google.com/books?id=KSA1HTTU-eMC	Independent author	Seems to be a reliable publisher	Description says complete biography of the subject so significant coverage is met	✔ 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 New York Post is a tabloid newspapers and it is not always subject to thorought fact checking - see WP:RSP. franklloydwright.org site is from related to the subject for such it is considered not independent. Cassiopeia^(talk) 08:31, 23 April 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: Meets criteria 1, 3 and 4 spelled out in WP:ARCHITECT.

Y meet WP:ARCHITECT # 1 and 2 but the full article passes all the criteria (1-4). Cassiopeia^(talk) 08:31, 23 April 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/	The IMDB link is dead, but either way IMDB is user-generated so not independent	Not reliable as user-generated	IMDB entries generally tend to have very limited bios for actors unless they are big names.	✘ No
http://www.bafta.org/wales	This is a reputable award show but it's just the main page link so not sure what to make of it. But even though it's reputable it's still promotional to a degree so I would assume it would be a NO, unless it was a non-contentious text like that he received a BAFTA award.	Again not sure as this is a main page link.	Not sure as this is a main page link.	✘ No
https://www.linkedin.com/in/jordan-d-98111a125	User-generated	User-generated, he could write whatever he wants with no editorial oversight. I could claim I was the CEO of Google and no one would bat an eye on Linkedin. But the link is dead.	Not sure as the link is dead.	✘ No
https://www.behindthevoiceactors.com/Jordan-David/	I would say it is not connected to the subject, but the site doesn't seem reputable enough to exclude the possibility of actors paying the site to promote certain content	Not reliable	Only trivial information about the 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 See below.

Source assessment table:
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm8902348/	subject is affiliated with imdb as the info is provided by the subject/or their associates for such the source is not independent	IMDb contains user-generated content	The source is a short biography of the subject	✘ No
http://www.bafta.org/wales	Source is independent	BAFTA, being a major national charity, is likely to be reliable on entertainment matters	Ihe reference leads onto BAFTA Wales' homepage where no information about the subject becomes apparent	✘ No
https://www.linkedin.com/in/jordan-d-98111a125	Linkedin profiles are normally created by their subjects	Linkedin is user-generated and therefore unreliable	Profile of the subject	✘ No
https://www.behindthevoiceactors.com/Jordan-David/	There does not seem to be a connection to the subject	Source is a little-known website	The source is about somebody other than the 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

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: Nothing to suggest he passes WP:ACTOR. None of the references are proper.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 08:31, 23 April 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	No connection to subject	As per WP:RSP is considered generally unreliable	Significant coverage	✘ No
http://stats.allblacks.com/asp/Profile.asp?ABID=1108	This is the site of the team he plays for, but I wouldn't have the expectation of the All Blacks lying about their players' stats. I would say it is independent but would prefer other third-party reliable sources for the stats.	Same comment here as the previous; no expectation that All Blacks would lie about their players' stats.	Is his personal page, so significant info	✔ Yes
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/warriors-league-team/news/article.cfm?c_id=360&objectid=10399308	Most of the article is an interview, so not independent	Most of the article is an interview, so not reliable	Significant coverage	✘ No
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/10/01/1096527943523.html	No connection to subject	Reliable newspaper	Significant coverage	✔ 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 For http://stats.allblacks.com/asp/Profile.asp?ABID=1108 - allblacks stats - it is considered not independent as it is associated with the subject but the souces is condiered relaible as it is linked to New Zealand Rugby which is likely to be a reliable source for rugby related information. Cassiopeia^(talk) 08:31, 23 April 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.

Answer: Subject meets Wikipedia:NRU#1-2 as he has played for All Blacks (high performance union) at the World Cup and has played in a fully professional rugby union competition.

Y Sonny Bill Williams (full content), the subject would also meet WP:NRU criteria 1, 2. and the subject also meets WP:RLN # 2. Cassiopeia^(talk) 08:31, 23 April 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	Major US newspaper	Reliable as per WP:RSP	? Cannot access due to a paywall but can tell from the title that this article would discuss songs for the Grammys, which would include a mention of the song	? Unknown
https://www.billboard.com/music/Bryan-Adams/chart-history/RTT	Independent music chart	Reliable	Shows that the song peaked at #2 on 9.28.1991	✔ Yes
http://americanradiohistory.com/Archive-Music-and-Media/90s/1991/MM-1991-10-25.pdf	? Link doesn't work	? Link doesn't work	? Link doesn't work	? Unknown
https://www.billboard.com/music/Bryan-Adams/chart-history/HSI	Independent music chart	Reliable	Shows that the song peaked 2 in HOT100 chart	✔ 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	Independent chart	Reliable	Shows that the song ranked 3 in RMP100 chart in 1991	✔ 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 the charting sources - the cover the subject in passing mentioned, but the sources are important to indicate that the subject passes WP:NSONG criteria. Cassiopeia^(talk) 14:04, 23 April 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:The sources for this entry are missing and the references box are for Petraeus.

Do click on the sources indicated above (in the texts section and the charts sections). Cassiopeia^(talk) 08:31, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:NSONGS says that a song may be notable if it has charted, but that is not necessarily notable. So I would say it's unclear and we would have to look beyond subject specific notability guidelines to determine if it's notable.

Y. the song is considered notable under Wikipedia:NSONGS #1 because it has been ranked on several national music charts Cassiopeia^(talk) 14:04, 23 April 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_	User-generated blog run by subject	User-generated blog	No stories to display, so unsure	✘ No
https://www.linkedin.com/in/kamlesh-bhatt-45392961/	User-generated work profile	Could write anything he wants without oversight	Significant to the point of his work history	✘ 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) 08:31, 23 April 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: Fail of Wikipedia:ARCHITECT. No references other than from user-generated sources.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 08:31, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

---

Nearlyevil665 Hi, see Assignment 2 above. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:29, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Nearlyevil665 For question 8 onward, pls open (click the show icon) to see the table. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:38, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia I had two tables already filled in, I assume these were overwritten with the empty boxes. Should I go ahead and just copy from the earlier revision? nearlyevil665 10:44, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia Also I assume the first one (Petreus) was an example and was supposed to be filled in for demonstrative purposes. It's empty now. nearlyevil665 10:46, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Nearlyevil665 The first example (Petreues) is back. For the rest, kindly fill them in. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:56, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia I'm done. Exercise 19 was unclear and I left a comment. nearlyevil665 17:37, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Nearlyevil665, See comments above. For Q18 and Q 19, see my comments on Answer 19 (the source can also be found in the ref box section). When you have done, pls ping. Cassiopeia^(talk) 08:31, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, done. Also, in editing mode all of the references lists all show up as Petraeus for whatever reason. nearlyevil665 09:01, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Nearlyevil665, see the comments. Let me know if you have any questions or you are ready to move on to the next assignment. Cassiopeia^(talk) 14:04, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, ready to move on! nearlyevil665 14:09, 23 April 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: This historical figure is nearly always referred to as Hannibal in all sources, hence the article title should be Hannibal as per WP:COMMONNAME.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:44, 24 April 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: Despite his legal name being Earvin Johnson Jr., per Wikipedia:COMMONNAME the name most commonly used is given preference so Magic Johnson should stay as the title.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:44, 24 April 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: The incident at the Pub is covered in reliable sources and is thus eligible as per Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. The last sentence is unsourced and thus falls under WP:BLPGOSSIP, should be deleted unless properly sourced from secondary sources.

Y. The content of Murray case was unsourced and it is contentious in nature. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:44, 24 April 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: As per WP:BLPPRIVACY articles should not include postal addresses, e-mail addresses, telephone numbers, or other contact information for living person. Therefore the number should be deleted. The information about her swimming accomplishments can be kept as there are proper references for them.

Y. Btw the address is belong to the White House of USA. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:44, 24 April 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 because it is in the US public domain. Answer - link/guideline: WP:PDI

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:44, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

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

Answer- Explanation: Public domain so yes, can be used. Answer - link/guideline: WP:PDI

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:44, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

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

Answer- Explanation: Yes because it says that the author of the image released it under Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication. Answer - link/guideline: As per WP:IUP (Freely licensed).

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:44, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

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

Answer- Explanation: No, because it has not been released into the public domain and it's actually for sale and even if buying it might not be eligible for re-use for mass use. Depends on the type of license the author provides when the image is sold. Answer - link/guideline: As per WP:IUP#COPYRIGHT

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:44, 24 April 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: Should be removed: brilliant, rare and exceptional beauty, destroyed, talent and marketability, watch right out of the gate.

She is a boxer. She turned Pro at the age of 19 after winning one amateur fight on December 14, 2013 where she defeated her opponent in 20 seconds. She fought under XXX promotion on her next fight on February 2014.

Y. Good. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:44, 24 April 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: Should be removed: popular, acclaimed, loved by all who have watched his films, tender and innocent.

He is a Bulgarian actor. He was born in Veliko Tarnovo and started working in the film industry since the age of 14. He has been featured in 44 films.

Y. Good. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:44, 24 April 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 provide balance and due weight because topics might and most likely will have differing opinions from various secondary sources. It is thus important to make sure that the viewpoints presented are not misrepresented and are illustrated in a way for the reader to understand which one is the predominant opinion and which one is the minority.

Y. It is important to provide a balance and due weight in mainstream views to represent all points of view in reliable sources. For example, Capital punishment - the article states the view of for and against of the punishment for a crime. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:44, 24 April 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 requires for all content to be based on reliable, published secondary sources, otherwise the site would become host to many differing original ideas and opinions, mostly conflicting with each other, and there would be no way to verify said opinions as they are original research and not based on any fact-checking or peer-review.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:44, 24 April 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: Original research could be inserted in the form of a citation from an interview where something is said that is relevant to the article.

Y. There are three known way to do it (1) as per your example - xxx stated that ...... (2) Direct quote (3) verbatim when the content is in the public domain such as Constitution of the United States. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:44, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

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

Answer: According to Sh. Shady Asluseleiman, the Quran dictates a modest dress code for Muslim men and women: clothing must be baggy, non see through and non-colorful or flashy. Asluseleiman categorically denounced jeans as an acceptable form of attire and encouraged female Muslims to pay more attention to the dress code.

Y. The key here is maintain WP:NPOV, no WP:COPYVIO and writes in your own words as supported by the source. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:44, 24 April 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, because it has to be referenced by independent, reliable sources and not by hearsay or someone's opinion as per WP:UNSOURCED.

Y. Pls also see WP:But it's true!. Cassiopeia^(talk)

---

Nearlyevil665 See assignment 3 above. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 14:18, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, I'm done! nearlyevil665 18:55, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Nearlyevil665 See comments above. Let me know if you have any questions or you are ready to move on to the next assignment. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:44, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, I'm ready to move on. nearlyevil665 06:56, 24 April 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.

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	Text so muddled that it is impossible to make sense of what is trying to be communicated from the author. Reserved for text that is totally ununderstable.	Y. Cassiopeia(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
2	G2	Edits that have been obviously made for test purposes, not applying to user sandboxes.	Y. Cassiopeia(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
3	G3	Applies to content that is blatantly vandalism or a hoax deliberately introduced to mislead users.	Y. Cassiopeia(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
4	G4	Recreation of a previously deleted page without any substantial edits from the deleted version, doesn't necessarily have to have the same title.	Y. Cassiopeia(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
5	G5	Applies to pages created by banned or blocked users but only from the moment they were banned or blocked, so if a page was created until they had been banned/blocked, then this won't apply.	Y. Cassiopeia(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
6	G6	Used for uncontroversial deletions of empty categories, redirects and orphaned templates	Y. Cassiopeia(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
7	G7	Applied when the author asks for a deletion of the page	Y. Cassiopeia(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
8	G8	Used when deleting a page that is dependent on another page that no longer exists	Y. Cassiopeia(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
9	G9	Deletions by the Wikimedia Foundation	Y. Cassiopeia(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
10	G10	Pages that are aimed at threatening, harassing or any other form of violence towards a person, persons or organizations.	Y. Cassiopeia(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
11	G11	Used for pages that are blatantly promotional and would need to be rewritten significantly to meet WP's guidelines.	Y. Cassiopeia(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
12	G12	Used for blatant copyright violations. The page should be entirely deleted only if there is no non-copyright violated edit to revert back to	Y. Cassiopeia(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
13	G13	Used for drafts and AfC submissions not edited in over 6 months	Y. Cassiopeia(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
14	G14	Used for disambiguation pages that disambiguate only one page	Y. Cassiopeia(talk) 06:14, 30 April 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	Used when it is impossible to identify the subject of the article	Y. Cassiopeia(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
2	A2	Used for pages that are not in English and are a copy of other Wiki language pages	Y. Cassiopeia(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
3	A3	Used for pages that have no actual content, excluding category tags, external links and other non-content sections	Y. Cassiopeia(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
4	A5	Used for pages that only provide a dictionary definition which can be instead used in Wiktionary	Y. Cassiopeia(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
5	A7	Used for pages where the text doesn't provide any indication of the importance of the real person, individual animal, commercial or non-commercial organization, web content, or organized event	Y. Cassiopeia(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
6	A9	Used for pages where the text doesn't provide any indication of importance for the musical work where none of the recording artists have a standalone article and where the text doesn't provide information about the significance of the musical work.	Y. Cassiopeia(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
7	A10	Used for a recently created page that is a duplicate of an existing Wikipedia page which doesn't provide any improvement to an existing page.	Y. Cassiopeia(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
8	A11	Used for pages where there is blatant assumption the subject is a creation or invention by the author or someone connected to the author. Doesn't apply to an article that can provide credible sources.	Y. Cassiopeia(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
9	R2	This is used for redirects from the main namespace to any other namespace except the Category:, Template:, Wikipedia:, Help: and Portal: namespaces,	Y. Cassiopeia(talk) 06:14, 30 April 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: Draft:Atlantic region official languages week 2021, CSD Log April 2021 #1.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Answer ii: Draft:Gabriel Ribeiro Campos más conhecido por "Biel ou Ga" atualmente com 18 anos tem uma paixão que é o freestyle, afinal entrou pra música através da rima., CSD Log April 2021 #2.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Answer iii: Draft:Adil Hossain, CSD Log April 2021 #5.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Answer iv: Draft:Jewelry and clothins, CSD Log April 2021 #15.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Answer v: Draft:Awez Darbar, CSD Log April 2021 #35.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:14, 30 April 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: We make the G12 nomination when there is no point of return as the article is overloaded with copyrighted text, and use the WP:REVDEL when there we can get rid of the copyrighted information and leave proper text.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

4. What constitute copyright infringement/violation.

Answer: Copyright infringement is the act of copying content from somewhere else which is not public domain or copying text/images without the permission of the copyright holder.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:14, 30 April 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: When we are directly citing someone from an interview

Y. Direct quote. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Answer ii: When we are citing a primary source text such as the Declaration of Independence

N citing a primary source is with identical source is still a violation of copyright unless the primary is a public domain such as United States Declaration of Independence which was pubished in 1775 as 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. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Answer iii: When the text copied is from a public domain

Y. Direct quote, PD and another one is "When the text is under certain Creative Commons licenses". Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

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

Answer: As all content on Wikipedia is free to re-use, it is important that all content posted on it is actually free otherwise people using Wikipedia will imply that it is free for use and potentially re-use, which the holder of the copyright will obviously have a problem with.

Y. The key point is that copyright infringement violation entails "legal implications". Wikipedia takes violation of copyvio "very seriously". Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:14, 30 April 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:Medicinal plants of Caucasus and North America:, CSD Log April 2021 #7

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Answer ii: Draft:Brotherhood of the Wolf (novel), CSD Log April 2021 #8

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Answer iii: Draft:Alliance of Bhāgavata Communists, CSD Log April 2021 #11

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Answer iv: Draft:N'Doul, CSD Log April 2021 #13

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Answer v: Draft:Itanagar Wildlife Sanctuary, CSD Log April 2021 #16

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:14, 30 April 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: G10 (Attack page) - This, CSD Log April 2021 #41

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Answer ii: G10 (Attack page) This, CSD Log April 2021 #42

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Answer iii: G10 (Attack page) This, CSD Log April 2021 #43

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Answer iv: CSD G1 (Patent nonsense) Draft:Carrot Land And The King, CSD Log April 2021#44

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Answer v: CSD G1 (Patent nonsense) Draft:Mydevtb, CSD Log April 2021#50

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:14, 30 April 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: R2 is reserved when making redirects from a page from the mainspace to a user space or draftspace, except for the Categories: Template:, Wikipedia:, Help: and Portal: namespaces'

Y. Note on R2 to draft space - We move articles to the draftspace to allow articles to be developed especially potential but unsourced WP:BLP article. 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 deems the if the articles are not improved or edit in 6 months, it could be nominated G13. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:14, 30 April 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: Brian von Helms, CSD Log April 2021 #53

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Answer ii CSD A7: Dal Baati Churma, CSD Log April 2021 #56

N. It was deleted under G7 - see here. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Answer iii CSD R2: The Children’s House (Rijeka, Croatia), CSD Log April 2021 #72 (Note that it was R2 deleted but later redirected.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Answer iv CSD R2: Angel Zarate, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&logid=117498588 (Doesn't appear in my CSD log because I mistakenly used another module for this)

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Answer v any criteria: Hammad Muhammad Khan, CSD Log April 2021 #67

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:14, 30 April 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: A COI/PAID editor can be spotted when in their editing we can observe obvious embellishments of the subject's accomplishments, writing somewhat personal information that is unsourced and unfound on web, citing many primary sources such as press releases or company statements, and in general the language suggests that the author is trying to promote the subject rather than make an encyclopedic entry about them.

Y. 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}}. COI editors can be sotted as per follow:

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. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

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

Answer: COI editors are strongly discouraged from pushing articles into mainspace or making direct edits but it is not actually prohibited, so the only thing I'd do is make sure that they've made the proper disclosures and that the article is not promotional or subjectively written.

Y. They should WP:DISCLOSE their COI (i) in their user pages and (ii) in the article talk pages. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:14, 30 April 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: Same as with COI, paid editors are strongly discouraged not explicitly forbidden to make mainspace creations or edits. I would make sure they've made the proper disclosures including disclosing their employers and where they were hired, including the third-party platform such as freelancer ones. If proper disclosures have not been made I would report it to Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard.

Y. They should WP:DISCLOSE their COI (i) in their user pages and (ii) in the article talk pages and the we "MUST" move the page to draft space in regarless how long, how many articles that have created and approved by reviewers/patrollers. This means the articles they created need to go through 2 approval processes in AfC (draft - article for creation) and then NPP (new page). AfC and NPP are 2 of the venues to create an articles. All approved AfC article will move to NPP for NPP approval, then only the article can be indexed by search engines. This is to ensure the articles are double checked by a reviewer and a patroller. (note: some editors have AfC and NPP user right and if AfC article is reviewed by the said editors then it dont need to go through NPP review the second time). Once the page is the mains pace, the creator need to ask WP:Edit request to add/change the content of the article in the article talk page by providing the associated sources. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

---

Nearlyevil665 See assignment 4 above. (Note: Assignment 4 & 5 would be the hardest assignment in this program. Tak you time to complete them). Cassiopeia^(talk) 07:04, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA Could you please confirm the diff format is acceptable in exercise 3? As the pages were deleted I can no longer find my tagging of it in my edit history so I assume I am supposed to show the diff from my CSD log? Please confirm at your earliest convenience. Thank you! nearlyevil665 18:37, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Nearlyevil665

1. hist diff on deleted page - Pls provide your CSD log info (Example April 2021 #26), article name.

2. I received a message from admin Liz on my talk page here of your wrong tagging of G13 and I also see her message on your talk page. Pls read the following carefully and be very careful and limit of future CSD/AfD/PROP taggings for they are closed by the admins (AfD if all the editors vote a keep and the article should be a keep then non-admin can close the discussion).

i. The program is based on at least 90% accuracy of CSD tagging for passing grade.

ii. CSD 13 and R2- (a) is only for draft page where by no edit from any editors for the last 6 months. (b) Before tagging, pls check if the subject and content might be notable, if so, do not tag for G13, but make a dummy edit and place "delay G13" on the edit summary. (We dont simply tag G13, just because nobody edit the page for the last 6 months). And pls only tag G13 sparingly, make sure it is absulotely not notable and do a WP:BEFORE. You also need to be very careful of request for R2 (from new page to draft space (not a move) but request from admin to do the move). If by any reason G13 can be savage and R2 does nto need to be perform, then dont tag them. Reason is that if R2 is made to draft and draft is make to G13, that means the draft article and its content is lost for good,for some editors do not check the content/subject might meet notablity guidlines prior nominate for G13. To tag R2 see Template:Db-r2 and before do R2 - pls read WP:NPPDRAFT carefully.

iii. Only tag G11 and G12 on draft page and hold off all other CSD (important)

See below for Notes and slow down with your tagging and only tag those you are very sure that meet the guidelines. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:49, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA, I've replied to both her message and on your user talk. Once again, my apologies for the screw-up. I'm glad I got the other G nominations correct as illustrated by my CSD log. We all learn the hard way I guess. One question, just to double check as I don't want to make another mistake: Exercises 8 and 10 still stand as they are instructed to be done, correct? nearlyevil665 16:21, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Nearlyevil665 I saw and thank you. You can go ahead to work on Q8 and Q10; however again, pls slow down on your CSD tagging and only tag those you are "`100%" sure that fit the guidelines especially R2. Thank you. Cassiopeia^(talk) 04:47, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA, how often do A 1-11 and R2 come up? I've been monitoring the New Page Patrol for the last two days through the Page Curation tool with no luck. I've only encountered two R2s, but they have already been tagged by another editor. Also, I know you said to refrain from draft nominations other than G11-12, but during my patrol today there was a draft article about an underage girl with attack content about her and her personal photo was uploaded as well, so I decided it was the right thing to tag that as G10 to get immediate attention from an admin. It was deleted within seconds. nearlyevil665 12:03, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Nearlyevil665 I suggest to only G11 and G12 on draft page as draft page is not on main space of Wikipedia and can not be search on the search engine (note: only new pages that has been reviewed will be indexed by search engine). Draft page is intended as "draft" and changes/content is added at periodically and majority of the editors are new to Wikipedia and experiencing on how to creating an article. Also certain CSD might not apply in draft page. You could find A1, A7, A9, R2 in new pages almost daily/every other day. We have about 300 + new pages created in Endlish Wikipedia daily. Just be patient and you would find them. If you resides in US zones time than I would be not hard to find them as the editing traffic in English Wikipedia is the highest. Btw I add WP:NPPDRAFT on the Notes section and pls have a read. Cassiopeia^(talk) 12:22, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA, I think I am not in a favorable time zone. I will stay up late up night one day if my luck doesn't turn around! nearlyevil665 12:23, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Nearlyevil665 A7 for The Luminosity Lab- Pls read "A7 and A9" explanation on the "Notes" section again. The version of The Luminosity Lab when you nominate the page for A7 - see [here did has a credible claim of significance (part of research entity of a notable University). Example of A7 content would be "Jose Cristian Pedrozo, known under the artistic name Cris Pedrozo, is a Uruguayan singer who practice with his band at his father garage on Tuesday, Friday and Saturday. They train very hard and hope to perform on the "Teacher Day" at the school auditorium on coming August 2020." or ""Jose Cristian Pedrozo, known under the artistic name Cris Pedrozo, is a Uruguayan singer. He loves singing since the age of 5 and convinces his parents to buy him a guitar so he could also write his own songs one day" Get it? (Pls note we can NOT CSD A7/A9/A11 a draft page but we just "recline/reject" the draf page when we review those draft pages). If a page do a have claim of significant even without a single source then it does not qualify A7. Dont A7 if there are some info on External link section. You can either do a WP:PROD, WP:BLPPROD or a WP:AfD (we will discuss it on Assignment 5). Btw pls read Wikipedia:Credible claim of significance again. Thank you. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:08, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA, this is just an update that I'm still working on the assignment, particularly finding R2. I've found and properly tagged others but there are several other patrollers and R2 is rare as it is, and if it does appear others tag it within seconds. I will continue monitoring and get back to you whenever I find these R2s. nearlyevil665 08:38, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA, honestly at this point I feel like I won't be able to find two R2s for weeks unless I find something eligible for draftification and then mark the redirect for deletion. But I'm not sure it would be a ethical thing to do given that I have a COI in finding something to draftify. I've been hitting Refrest List for days in hopes of finding a R2 nomination and if anything does come up it's already tagged by the person who draftified the article. Please advise.nearlyevil665 17:34, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Nearlyevil665 I dont quite understand what you meant by "I find something eligible for draftification and then mark the redirect for deletion. But I'm not sure it would be a ethical thing to do given that I have a COI in finding something to draftify." Maybe you care to explain a little more in details. R2 is CSD name space change (example from mainspace to draft space etc.) When you "request for R2" from admin to aprove it (not normal move) see Template:Db-r2 on instruction on how to request for R2. Here is an example - [Thomas Reynolds (1860's Baseball Player)]] - this version here you could R2. If you need more time to find R2 then so be it. Once you have finsihed the rest of the questions, then let me know and I will reveiw them. When you find the R2 later then I will look at it in a later date. Cassiopeia^(talk) 01:23, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA, thank you for being so patient with me on this one. I think I got something wrong about R2s so let me explain. The way I see is as follows:

We use R2 nomination only for redirect pages where the page exists in mainspace and is a redirect to any other namespace except for Category:, Template:, Wikipedia:, Help: and Portal: namespaces. So for example, let's say there is a mainspace page CASSIOPEIA (Constellation) and the only content in it is: "Redirect Draft:CASSIOPEIA (Constellation)". This would be eligible for R2 nomination.

But this kind of pages only last a few seconds as the people who made the move (non-admin moving article from mainspace into draftspace) request the R2 through Twinkle themselves on the leftover redirect page rather quickly.

That's what I meant under the sentence you asked me to clarify. I could find a new stub page say CASSIOPEIA which has some potential but not ready for mainspace, move it manually to draft and then tag the leftover page with "Redirect Draft:CASSIOPEIA (Constellation)" for R2.

I'm sorry if this is super confusing or I am not grasping something! Please bear with me! nearlyevil665 05:37, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA, I think I am finally done. You can review. Thank you! nearlyevil665 17:57, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

nearlyevil665 Reviewed and well-done! See comments above. A "normal move" via Twinkle can be done by any confirmed editors. R2 is a "request/nominate" the page to be deleted from main space and move to draft space without a redirect - see [names to move them, subject to policy, without leaving behind a redirect - see Redirect suppression criteria criteria #6. There is a "Page Mover" user right which allow the user to move the article to draft space without the involvement/request from admins. No many reviewers have page mover user right. So those new page articles would usually either mark reviewed if the reviewer deems the article pass the notability guidelines, and if not then the could tag the articles for PROP, BLP PROD, request for redirect, request for merge, AfD. AfD outcome can be redirect/merge/dratify/delete or keep. I will post Assignment 5 on my next edit. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

---

Notes:

A7 & A9 - WP:Credible claim of significance - If the subject content do have such claim, then it is not a A7 even the article at the stage 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. If it is a WP:BLP without source, then WP:BLPPROD or R2. There are other alternatives which we will discuss on the next assignment.

G11 (promo) - What constitute a G11? At times it is hard to define. Although if a article is blatantly promote or adversities 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 minimise 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. I have indicated to you on Assignement 3 - section 3.3 - Q5, Q6, Q7 that 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. [3]

2. Audi was fined US $ 965,000 over copyright infringement for using 10 words from Brian Andreas’s story of “Angel of Mercy” - [4]

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.

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 review.

Hope the above help. Note the above doest not substitute the Wikipedia links I provided above. Please make sure you read the reading material as well. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:16, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

---

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: We propose a PROD when we expect the deletion nomination won't be contested so in other words when there is an expectation that no one will object to the deletion. It is the next best thing to CSD if none of the CSD criteria apply to the page.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

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

Answer: Do a WP:BEFORE to consider alternatives such as improving the article or moving it to draftspace if there is a potential for the article to be worked on by other people. Also consider merging or redirecting. Furthermore as PROD can only be applied once we should check the logs and make sure it hasn't been unsuccessfully prodded in the past, discussed at AfD/FfD or undeleted.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 14 May 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: To be eligible for BLPPROD the article contains no sources in any form (as references, external links, etc.) which support any statements made about the person in the biography.

The alternatives are:

1) Doing a Wikipedia:BEFORE so that we can independently add a reference

2) Move to draft if there is potential for future development

3) Mark it as PROD if there is no expectation of objections

Y, the options would depend on the content/subject info. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

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

Answer: First of all we do a Wikipedia:BEFORE to make sure that there are no viable references that could establish a pass for notability criteria. If there is an expectation that the deletion would be controversial (otherwise we would use a PROD, CSD or BLPPROD) we nominate the article for AFD and present our opinion on why the article fails the GNG or subject specific notability criteria.

Y. Good. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

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

Answer: PROD and BLPPROD are put up for at least 7 days, while AFDs can get relisted within a week if there is no clear consensus.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 14 May 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: We can still use any other deletion mechanisms (CSD, AfD, PROD).

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

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

Answer: If the article is a clear violation of the CSD then we prioritize those nominations, if it doesn't apply to any of the CSD then for non-controversial I'd go for PROD or BLPROD, depending on whether it's a biography of a living person without a reference or not. If I expect objections then I'd go for an AfD.

Y. Well-done. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

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

Answer: We would merge one page with another if the articles are duplicating each other or are so similar with each other by content that it makes more sense to have them merged together.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

9. List 10 reasons we purpose WP:REDIR.

Answer: 1) Redirecting singular and plural forms of same subject to the same article 2) Closely related words 3) Alternative spellings or punctuation 4) Abbreviations and initialisms 5) Likely misspellings 6) Punctuation issues 7) Alternate forms of a name as found in reliable sources and common databases 8) More specific forms of names 9) Redirects to disambiguation pages that do not contain "(disambiguation)" in the title 10) Likely alternative capitalizations

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

10. When article can be moved to draft space?

Answer: We move an article to draftspace when the subject has potential merit to be notable but the article fails to demonstrate said notability through references. We can also move an article to draftspace when the subject is notable but is so poorly written or structured that it requires substantial editing to be published on mainspace.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

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

Answer 1: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Khukh Chononuud FC - No reliable secondary sources for WP:GNG and the team is not playing in the first-tier league hence not a pass of WP:NFOOTY

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Answer 2: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Transgender Restroom - Perhaps a notable topic for a standalone article, but very poorly written like an essay. I didn't draftify this as I wasn't sure if the subject merited notability for a standalone article.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Answer 3: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Group 4 Networks - No multiple reliable secondary sources to pass WP:GNG and nothing passing WP:NORG criteria

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Answer 4: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Serna Amini - No reliable sources, used Google Translate for the Persian sources and they are either primary sources or trivial mentions of the subject in non-reliable publications.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Answer 5: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shahram Shabpareh - References provided are either interviews, primary sources or photo galleries of the musician performing at a concert. Not a pass of WP:GNG or the WP:SINGER criteria.

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/Ata Abdullayev - Voted delete per nom as the references didnt indicate a pass of WP:GNG/WP:SIGCOV and his football record didn't pass any WP:FOOTY criteria.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Answer 2: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alan Keely - Voted delete as he hasn't played in Ireland's premier division and is thus not a pass of WP:NFOOTY. Doesn't have multiple reliable secondary sources (other than his death) that would establish notability per WP:GNG

N. The result was no consensus but sources provided do pass GNG. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Answer 3: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cannibal Corpse (album) - Merge with the Eaten Back to Life album it was re-recorded for could be a better option than delete as it could serve as a historical background a notable album

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 21:10, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Answer 4:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Project GreenWorld International - All references are either primary sources such as blog websites or a non-significant coverage in media sources.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Answer 5: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Butler Hill - Delete as there is nothing to indicate a pass of WP:GNG, let alone WP:GEOLAND or WP:GEOFEAT.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

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

Answer 1: [5] - Nominated this for PROD as there were no references and a WP:BEFORE didn't show multiple reliable secondary sources. The article also showed no indication of passing WP:BAND. This could potentially be nominated through AfD.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Answer 2: - Here I used google translate and it was clear the article was about a special (divine) ox living in India for which no sources were provided and for which no sources came up during a WP:BEFORE

Y. It was redirected. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

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

Answer 1: [6] Nominate this biography article for BLPROD as it had not references but this was moved to draftspace by the author before the BLPROD nomination could be answered.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Answer 2: [7] - Nominated this for article for BLPROD as there were no references but these were added later on and an AfD was open in its stead

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:14, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

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

Answer 1: [8] - Draftified as a WP:BEFORE showed that there could be some potential merit in the subject, especially in non-English sources, but the article was in no state to be published on mainspace.

Y. It should be a R2 move (request R2 for admin to move) and not you move the article yourself.02:14, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Answer 2: [9] - A WP:BEFORE showed that there are some sources and articles on Greater Portugal, but the page was bare to the bones and provided nothing of value to the reader and had no references at all, so draftified so it could be properly edited as an encyclopedic entry.

Y. It should be a R2 move (request R2 for admin to move) and not you move the article yourself.02:14, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

---

Nearlyevil665 See assignment 5 above. Cassiopeia^(talk) 06:18, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA, I'm done, feel free to take a look! Thank you! nearlyevil665 19:20, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA, Sorry for the lale reply. I have been travelling and will be moving to another city; but I will look at the assignment as soon I have some free time. Cassiopeia^(talk) 00:58, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA, take your time, I'm in no hurry! Safe travels! nearlyevil665 06:24, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Nearlyevil665 Well-done. Thereis only one question to be review as the article was relist the second time in AfD. When there is a result of the AfD, then I will review it. 02:14, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Nearlyevil665 Reviewed the last AfD. Good work. Cassiopeia^(talk) 21:10, 28 May 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.

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: Tagging is used to indicate that there is a problem or a number of issues within an article that needs to be addressed.

Y Tags inform and encourage editors to improve the article when they happen to come across them and it also serve as a message that the content yet be reach an encyclopedic standard. It is a good practice if we have time, it would be best to fix the issue instead of tagging. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

2. What does "drive by tagging" mean?

Answer: Drive by tagging is a lazy form of tagging where the problem is not obviously indicated therefore making it difficult or impossible for another editor to identify what exactly is the source of the problem.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

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

Answer: 1) Using too many tags 2) Using tags that are near or fully identical 3) Being vague with tags hence making it difficult for editors to understand what needs to be fixed 4) Unhelpful tags such as using tags on an article that is blatantly a fail of WP:GNG 5) Wrong tags such as ones that cannot communicate what the problem is exactly, it is recommended to fix the problem yourself or use the talk page 6) Easily fixable problem that can be solved by the editor without need of a tag. I cannot find the other two.

Y. (7) Removing tags at the inappropriate time. (8) Tagging to make a point about an article. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

4. When it is appropriate to remove the tags?

Answer: As long as you don't have a COI it is appropriate to remove a tag if it is clear the problem identified by the tag is no longer there. If the original tag creator posted on the talk page then it is customary to reply to them why you had removed the tag. For controversial issues it is recommended to reply to the talk page and wait for a few days for a consensus to be build.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 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: N/A.

ii. Answer: N/A.

iii. Answer: N/A.

iv. Answer: N/A.

v. Answer: N/A.

vi. Answer: N/A.

vii. Answer: N/A.

viii. Answer: N/A.

ix. Answer: N/A.

x. Answer: N/A.

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: Sheetal Sharma

Y This version. Pls provide hist diff next time. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

ii. Answer: Aaliyah Wilson

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

iii. Answer: Kamala (TV series)

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

iv. Answer: Bathochordaeus mcnutti

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

v. Answer: Paratriacanthodes retrospinis

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

vi. Answer: Marry Me, Marry You

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

vii. Answer: Trebellia gens

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

viii. Answer: Lillian Knight (silent film actress)

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

ix. Answer: Yang-je Hwang

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

x. Answer:Automobili Estrema

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 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: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Benjamin_Morgan_Palmer&oldid=1023153575

Y. This version. Pls provide normal hist diff next time and if there is more than one cat could be placed then do so. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

ii. Answer: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Suren_Barseghyan&oldid=1023153635

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

iii. Answer: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Palvanniyaz_Khodja_Yusupov&oldid=1023153746

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

iv. Answer: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Spycies&oldid=1023153810

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

v. Answer: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Caminito_de_Totana&oldid=1023154073

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

vi. Answer:https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Guttahalli&oldid=1023154151

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

vii. Answer:https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hymn_of_Heaven&oldid=1023154230

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

viii. Answer: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Trud,_Bulgaria&oldid=1023774632

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

ix. Answer: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dhangadhi_FC&oldid=1023775193

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

x. Answer: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Demonstration_(Pile_album)&oldid=1023775301

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 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: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jos%C3%A9_Luis_El%C3%ADas&oldid=1023231229

Y Should put all possible WikiProject and its sub parameters - see here. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

ii. Answer: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bill_Murray_(defensive_lineman)&oldid=1023231178

Y Should put all possible WikiProject and its sub parameters - see here. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

iii. Answer: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft_talk:UGC_149&oldid=1023231104

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

iv. Answer: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2019_Tuvalu_A-Division&oldid=1023231064

Y Should put all possible WikiProject and its sub parameters - see here. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

v. Answer: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Next_Mizoram_Legislative_Assembly_election&oldid=1023230991

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

vi. Answer: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Fat_Boy_(hamburger)&oldid=1023230960

Y Should put all possible WikiProject and its sub parameters - see here. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

vii. Answer: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2020_Tuvalu_A-Division&oldid=1023230891

Y Should put all possible WikiProject and its sub parameters - see here. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

viii. Answer: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Campo_de_San_Juan&oldid=1023775790

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

ix. Answer: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Good_4_u&oldid=1023230726

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

x. Answer: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Embassy_of_Syria_in_Kuala_Lumpur&oldid=1023775899

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 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: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Abdulrahman_El_Bahnasawy&oldid=1023776062

Y this version. Pls provide the normal hist diff next time. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

ii. Answer: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sabino_Vengco&oldid=1023776107

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

iii. Answer: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Embassy_of_Syria_in_Kuala_Lumpur&oldid=1023776235

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

iv. Answer: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Embassy_of_the_United_States,_Manama&oldid=1023776302

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

v. Answer: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chaitra_Reddy&oldid=1023776330

Y I take it as what you placed eventhought I could not see your edit as the page has been deleted - see here. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

vi. Answer: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=St._Mary%27s_School_and_Asylum&oldid=1023776417

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

vii. Answer: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Phoenix_Hotel_(Dedham,_Massachusetts)&oldid=1023776487

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

viii. Answer: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dainichi_Eihai&oldid=1023776697

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

ix. Answer: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Flyovers_in_Coimbatore&oldid=1023776742

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

x. Answer: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Butterflies_(Skrillex_song)&oldid=1023776853

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

---

Nearlyevil665 See assignment 6 above. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:16, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, everything is clear but I'm not sure about the exercise 5 'provide associate personal message to creator using page curator tool'. How do I provide this message? I used Twinkle to tag a page as uncategorized, do I then go to the creator's talk page and write a customized message?nearlyevil665 05:48, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, I'm done except for exercise 5 for which I have left a comment above. nearlyevil665 08:29, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Nearlyevil665 Sorry for the delay. I have been busy for the last 3 weeks as I was travelling and moving back to Sydney. Since you not yet a new page reviewer, you dont need to do question 5. See comments. Stay safe and best, Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 26 May 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: We remain civil and assume good faith (like a new user unaware of rules) unless it is a blatant form of bad faith editing. If it's the latter we can use Twinkle to post a warning message on their user talk page with the correct notice. We can also review their user talk page to see if they had received any prior warnings and might consider ARV if there was a final warning in addition to the warning.

Y. We treat IP or registered user the same way. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

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

i. Answer: Write them a personalized message on their user talk page.

Y. Good. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

ii. Answer: Use Twinkle for an automated welcome message that is tailored to them.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

iii. Answer: Take your time to answer any questions that they may have.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

iv. Answer: Do not overuse automated messages if you see that they have not yielded any results or feedback and instead send them customized messages.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

v. Answer: Assume good faith and offer support instead of criticism.

Y. Good. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

vi. Answer: Use edit summaries when reverting their edits so that they understand what was done incorrectly.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

vii. Answer: If a newcomer is having problems in a specific area, guide them to a specific essay or guideline that would help them better understand their mistakes.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

viii. Answer: Avoid personal insults or anything that could be construed as an attach on character.

Y. Good. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

ix. Answer: Treat others the way you would want to be treated

Y. Good. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

x. Answer: Do not overestimate your capabilities and refrain from giving guidance, instead suggest help from more experienced users

Y. Good. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

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

i. Answer: Do not call people sockpuppets or meatpuppets

Y. Unless there are solid evidence where we will report the editors involved. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

ii. Answer: Do not attack newcomers for minor mistakes that can be fixed in an instant, such as typos or missing commas

Y. Good. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

iii. Answer: Be constructive and respectful when pointing out to mistakes

Y. Good. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

iv. Answer: Do not act condescending - we all were beginners at some point

Y. Good. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

v. Answer: Writing personalized messages instead of bombarding them with automated messages

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

vi. Answer: Feel comfortable pointing out little things like how to sign posts or find previous discussions

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

vii. Answer: Talk in English that could be comprehensible to everyone instead of specific jargon that requires a dictionary

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

viii. Answer: Encourage newcomers to be bold in their editing

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

ix. Answer: Remind newcomers that everything on Wikipedia is saved and it's not the end of the world if something gets reverted

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

x. Answer: Don't expect articles from newcomers to be GA from the moment of inception, instead allow some time before bombarding it with tags

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

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

i. Answer: User talk:MarleyEIredale

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

ii. Answer: User talk:SthnPata

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

iii. Answer: User talk:Poodlelibrarian

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

iv. Answer: User talk:Sayyar6041

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

v. Answer: User talk:Zalgas9

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

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

i. Answer: If personal identifiable information is posted that could out someone then I would contact the Oversight team to strike and revert any such edits in the meanwhile.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

ii. Answer: If someone posted blatantly derogatory comments that served no encyclopedic value, this would be reverted and a thread would be opened on their user talk page with a warning. If the edits were egregious to the point of requiring immediate action, I'd use ARV.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

iii. Answer: If someone posted sexual harassment, violence or calls to any sort of illegal activity this would be reverted and reported to the ANI.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

iv. Answer: Any form of personal or legal threat should be reported to ANI.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

v. Answer: Don't be disruptive or rude just because you are being targeted. Instead, suggest the person reconsider their behavior or use the respective reporting mechanism if all constructive communication falls through

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 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:ExRat - rewarded with the Estonia Star as they have created uncountable number of articles on Estonian subjects.

Y. Again pls provide hist diff next time. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

ii. Answer: User:Robert McClenon - rewarded with Random Act of Kindness as I've seen this editor being an all-around good editor that is helpful and patient Nearlyevil665 pls provide hist diff. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

iii. Answer: User:Finngall - Rewarded with Anti-Vandalism as I've seen his reverts on a handful of articles (much faster than myself) and also their steadfast dedication to uncovering sockfarms

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

iv. Answer: User:Spiderone - Rewarded with Special Barnstar as they literally never sleep. WP:DELSORT 24/7.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

v. Answer:User talk:KylieTastic - I'm an active AfC reviewer and I've seen them being very active and to the point with their reviews!

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

---

Nearlyevil665 See Assignment 7 above. Ping me when you have finished. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:38, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA, I hope your move went well! I'm done with the latest assignment! nearlyevil665 06:23, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

:Nearlyevil665 Good work. Pls provide hist diff for Answer 2 under "A token of appreciation" section. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:51, 28 May 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:Nearlyevil665/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

---

Nearlyevil665, No exercises for Assignment 8 - just a list of tools for NPP reviewer and make sure you have intalled/downloaded/enabled them. Your AfD log shows a handful of the AfD articles were they voted "delete" which you had vote keep/speddy keep. Pls go back and check on the article (the version when the article where nominated for AfD) and view other editors and closing editors/admin comments. Also pls check the article against all the notability guidlines which are the core guidlines which the AfD article discussion are based. If you are not sure about the AfD article of which dicisions you would vote the AfD due to whatever reasons (not sure of if the articles meet notability guidelines, no familiar with the subject/subject matter, sources might be available from other langugues besides English) then dont vote the AfD. Also always do a WP:BEFORE AND check the notability guidlines prior voting. Cassiopeia^(talk) 00:05, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

@Cassiopeia: I think you might have pinged the wrong editor. Hope everything I going well. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 08:27, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Never mind. You've changed it already. Modussiccandi (talk) 08:29, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Modussiccandi I did and corrected. Sorry for the inconvenience cause. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:35, 29 May 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.

---

Nearlyevil665, The above are notes either from the discussion we had before or they might be new to you. Pls study them. Cassiopeia^(talk) 00:14, 29 May 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. 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 = Rodrigo González Catalán
2. Article titles = OK
3. Images copyright = Says own work, but google reverse image found this, which is the identical photo but with a modified background.
4. NPOV = Yes
5. COI / PAID = N/A
6. COPYVIO = No
7. Article Class = Stub
8. Short Descr = Chilean footballer
9. Categories = Living people, 1995 births, People from Cachapoal Province, People from O'Higgins Region, Chilean footballers, Chilean Primera División players, Primera B de Chile players, San Luis de Quillota footballers, Unión Española footballers, Unión La Calera footballers, Association football defenders
10. Review = Mark as reviewed
11. Reason (for 10) = WP:NFOOTBALL#2
12. Sources: Enough to demonstrate he has played for a top-tier club in Chile. The Twitter reference can be removed.

Source assessment table:
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
http://sanluissa.cl/el-camino-de-rodrigo-gonzalez/	? Club site, definitely not independent for verifying skills. Useful to show he actually played for this club.	? Same as above	Significant coverage	? Unknown
https://www.anfp.cl/noticia/32390/rodrigo-gonzalez-es-la-segunda-incorporacion-de-union-espanola	? Chile's Football federation website, so independent to the point of verifying trivial information, not achievements	Reliable to the point of verifying trivial information	Yes	? Unknown
https://tntsports.cl/nacional/Union-anuncia-el-regreso-del-Huaso-Gonzalez-20201007-0024.html	Sports channel, nothing to indicate non-independence	Reliable	Yes	✔ Yes
https://twitter.com/sanluis_qta/status/1372536179002896391	Club's official twitter account	Club's official twitter account	Just a tweet, so cannot be significant	✘ 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. The image of the URL is no longer there. Next time if you see Copyvio for image, make a CSD copyvio at the Wikimedia Common. Copy the file name and paste it on the search field then CSD it (see CSD template - here. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:55, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

---

2.

1. Article = Niklas_Elmqvist
2. Article titles = OK
3. Images copyright = N/A
4. NPOV = Yes
5. COI / PAID = N/A
6. COPYVIO = No
7. Article Class = Start
8. Short Descr = American computer scientist
9. Categories = American computer scientists, University of Maryland, College Park faculty, Living people, Human–computer interaction researchers
10. Review = Mark as reviewed
11. Reason (for 10) = Stellar citation index, pass of WP:NPROF. One of his publications has 18000+ citations.
12. Sources:

Source assessment table:
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://ischool.umd.edu/about/directory/niklas-elmqvist	University website, useful to confirm positions	University website	University website	✘ No
https://hcil.umd.edu/hcil-overview/	University lab website, useful to confirm positions	University lab website	University lab website	✘ No
https://engineering.purdue.edu/~elm/	University website, useful to confirm positions	University website, useful to confirm positions	University website, useful to confirm positions	✘ No
https://www.purdue.edu/discoverypark/vaccine/	? Incorrect link to mainpage	? Incorrect link to mainpage	? Incorrect link to mainpage	? Unknown
http://users.umiacs.umd.edu/~elm/doc/elmqvist-cv.pdf	? CV on university page, useful for confirming trivial data as there is an expectation the University would oversee any errors in the CV	? CV on university page	CV on university page	? 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. CV on university page would considered not independent. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:55, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

---

3.

1. Article = New Thing (song)
2. Article titles = Ok
3. Images copyright = N/A
4. NPOV = Yes
5. COI / PAID = N/A
6. COPYVIO = No
7. Article Class = stub
8. Short Descr = 1989 single by Enuff Z'nuff
9. Categories = Glam metal songs, 1989 singles, Atco Records singles, Power pop songs, 1989 songs, Enuff Z'nuff songs
10. Review = Mark as reviewed
11. Reason (for 10) = WP:NSINGLE as it was featured on the Top 100 Hot Billboard
12. Sources: Didn't put in the last two references as they are billboard.com references that show a pass of WP:NSINGLE

Source assessment table:
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/05/arts/music/hair-metal-videos.html	? Paywalled	? Paywalled	? Paywalled	? Unknown
https://www.allmusic.com/album/enuff-znuff-mw0000201541?1622539746930	? Unclear, reviews are generally hard to identify as reliable or independent	? Unclear, reviews are generally hard to identify as reliable or independent	Y	? Unknown
https://www.blabbermouth.net/news/enuff-znuffs-new-album-to-include-one-of-jani-lanes-final-recordings/	Looks independent	? Unclear reliability	Y	? Unknown
https://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/rock/8471854/chip-znuff-steps-into-frontman-role-new-enuff-znuff-alum-diamond-boy	Yes	Yes	Yes	✔ 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 The article has been moved to New Thing (Enuff Z'Nuff song). As per info on Assignment 2 (2.1) , we could seek help from WP:RX for paid wall articles. All music source is used quite often in music/song article. Coupled with other independent, reliable source, we usually would accept the source. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:55, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

---

4.

1. Article = Ben Trbojevic
2. Article titles = Ok
3. Images copyright = CC BY-SA 2.0
4. NPOV = Yes
5. COI / PAID = N/A
6. COPYVIO = No
7. Article Class = Stub
8. Short Descr = Australian rugby league footballer
9. Categories = 2001 births, Australian people of Croatian descent, Living people, Rugby league centres, Australian people of Serbian descent
10. Review = Mark as reviewed
11. Reason (for 10) = Plays in NRL, hence a pass of WP:RLN
12. Sources: Bad sources. I'd use this, or this, to easily pass WP:RLN.

Source assessment table:
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
http://www.rugbyleagueproject.org/players/ben-trbojevic/summary.html	? Tricky one. The site has been discussed on perennial sources discussion board and it is run by volunteers. Might be useful for verifying very trivial information.	? Same as above	Yes	? Unknown
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lp13snkDjgk	Dead video	Dead video	? Dead video	✘ No
https://twitter.com/serbianrl/status/576684185479475200	Tweet, not even from a verified account	Tweet, not even from a verified account	No, even has the name wrong (unless he has a different nickname)	✘ No
https://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nrl-premiership/jake-and-tom-trbojevic-are-manlys-younger-version-of-the-stewart-brothers/story-e6frf3ru-1227210298766	Dead link? I can only see the title of the article	Dead link?	? Dead link?	? 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 Remove all bad sources from articles next time. I have added some sources. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:55, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

---

5.

1. Article = Topaz (company)
2. Article titles = Ok
3. Images copyright = N/A
4. NPOV = A bit muddy on this one. Some wordings and unsourced content smell like promotional or ideological language.
5. COI / PAID = N/A
6. COPYVIO = No
7. Article Class = Start
8. Short Descr = None, could be 'Ukrainian arms manufacturing plant'
9. Categories = None, could be Military Industry, Military Equipment, Defence companies of Ukraine
10. Review = AfD as failing WP:GNG and WP:NCOMP, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Topaz_%28company%29&type=revision&diff=1026424407&oldid=1026171451
11. Reason (for 10) = None of the references count toward GNG
12. Sources

Source assessment table:
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
http://www.military-informer.narod.ru/pvo-kolchuga.html	Looks like an independent military niche website	? Unclear	The article is about Kolchuga passive sensor, the company is mentioned in the last paragraphs as the manufacturer of said system	✘ No
https://informnapalm.org/ua/osnovni-dosyagnennya-oboronno-promyslovogo-kompleksu-ukrayiny-za-2017-rik-chastyna-iii/	? Self-stated to be run by volunteers, unclear editorial oversight. Either way mentions the company once in passing. This article is about achievements of Ukrainian defense military in 2017	? Unclear	No	✘ No
https://glavcom.ua/interviews/130696-direktor-donetskogo-%C2%ABtopaza%C2%BB-jurij-rjabkin-%C2%ABkolchugi%C2%BB-my-uspeli-vyvezti.html	Interview piece	Reliable media	Interview with representative of the company	✘ No
https://ukurier.gov.ua/uk/articles/oleksandr-ponomarov-ukravshi-zavod-rosiyani-poveli/	This is an interview piece in a reliable newspaper	This is an interview piece in a reliable newspaper	This is an interview piece in a reliable newspaper	✘ No
https://www.ukrmilitary.com/2016/08/topaz.html	? Unclear independence	? Unclear reliability	Just run-off-the-mill coverage of company ownership transfer	✘ 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 The new sources (in Russian) have added since your AfD. I usually would not AfD or review an article where by many sources would be found in the local languages for sources might be found outside what is in the article. when AfD, do indicate the interview source (for the source (publication such as Guardian nespaper) might be reliable but sinc eit is an interview piece then it would considered not independent). Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:55, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

---

6.

1. Article = Jan Low
2. Article titles = Ok
3. Images copyright = CC BY-NC-SA 2.0 for headshot, United States government work for potato
4. NPOV = Yes
5. COI / PAID = N/A
6. COPYVIO = No
7. Article Class = start
8. Short Descr = American food scientist
9. Categories = People from Denver, American food scientists, Living people, Pomona College alumni, Women food scientists,
10. Review = Passes review
11. Reason (for 10) = Recipient of the highly prestigious and selective World Food Prize. WP:NACADEMIC#2
12. Sources

Source assessment table:
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.worldfoodprize.org/en/laureates/20102019_laureates/2016_andrade_bouis_low_and_mwanga/	World Food Prize website	Yes	No, but establishes pass of WP:PROF as it proves she had received the award	✘ No
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-37619154	Independent	Reliable	Not significant coverage of the subject per se, but confirms receipt of the award	✘ No
https://cornellsun.com/2016/08/23/dr-jan-low-fights-global-malnutrition-with-sweet-potatoes/	Independent newspaper	Reliable	Yes, covers Low in detail	✔ Yes
				? 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) 09:55, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

---

7.

1. Article = Gui Santos
2. Article titles = OK
3. Images copyright = N/A
4. NPOV = No
5. COI / PAID = N/A
6. COPYVIO = No
7. Article Class = Start
8. Short Descr = Brazilian basketball player
9. Categories = Brazilian men's basketball player, Sportspeople from Brasília, Minas Tênis Clube basketball players
10. Review = AfD https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gui_Santos&type=revision&diff=1026703293&oldid=1026694879
11. Reason (for v) = Doesn't play in a top-tier national league as per Wikipedia:NBASKETBALL, also looks like WP:TOOSOON as he is yet to be selected for the first two rounds of the NBA draft.
12. Sources

Source assessment table:
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://minastenisclube.com.br/noticias/basquete-formado-na-base-do-minas-gui-santos-esta-inscrito-no-draft/	Club website	? Unclear	Significant coverage	✘ No
https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/31302089/brazil-gui-santos-entering-2021-nba-draft	This is ESPN	Yes	Yes	✔ Yes
http://www.fiba.basketball/u17sudamericano/2019/news/brazil-claim-south-american-u17-championship-2019-title-in-chile	Probably independent	Reads like a puffery piece	Nothing about the subject	✘ No
https://www.radiopoliesportiva.com.br/gui-santos-do-minas-e-selecao-brasileira-comenta-sobre-grande-fase-no-nbb-13/	? Unclear	Written by a journalist student	Yes, but is an interview piece mostly	✘ No
https://www.espn.com.br/basquete/artigo/_/id/4974298/nbb-armador-de-16-anos-do-minas-tenis-clube-joga-por-3-categorias-brinca-sobre-enem-e-e-desafiado-por-companheiros	Yes	Yes	Yes	✔ 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 It looks like the article passes GNG especially Portuguese sources. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:55, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

---

8.

1. Article = Minden (baseball)
2. Article titles = Ok
3. Images copyright = N/A
4. NPOV = Yes
5. COI / PAID = N/A
6. COPYVIO = No
7. Article Class = start
8. Short Descr = Minor League Baseball team
9. Categories = Baseball teams established in 1903, Defunct minor league baseball teams, Defunct baseball teams in Nebraska, Nebraska State League teams, Central Nebraska League teams
10. Review = Delete or merge with Central Nebraska League. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Minden_%28baseball%29&type=revision&diff=1026426037&oldid=1026396883
11. Reason (for v) = Fails Wikipedia:GNG and Wikipedia:NBASEBALL.
12. Sources

Source assessment table:
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/league.cgi?id=3a663489	Independent	Reliable	Just a score sheet (with no information) that proves the league existed	✘ No
https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/team.cgi	Independent	Reliable	Unclear link, general list of all teams	✘ 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. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:55, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

---

9.

1. Article = Luis Marté (infielder)
2. Article titles = Ok
3. Images copyright = N/A
4. NPOV = Yes
5. COI / PAID = N/A
6. COPYVIO = No
7. Article Class = Start
8. Short Descr = Dominican-American baseball player
9. Categories = Living people, Major League Baseball players from the Dominican Republic, Major League Baseball infielders, Miami Marlins players
10. Review = Pass
11. Reason (for v) = Wikipedia:NBASEBALL pass as he has played in MLB
12. Sources

Source assessment table:
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=marte-005lui	Independent	Reliable as this is a reliable baseball reference site	Covers player's stats and performance	✔ Yes
https://www.mlb.com/player/luis-marte-606336?stats=career-r-hitting-minors&year=2021	Official MLB site	Official MLB site	Covers player's stats and performance	✔ Yes
https://www.milb.com/player/luis-marte-606336	Official MILB site	Official MILB site	Covers player's stats and performance	✔ Yes
https://www.miamiherald.com/sports/mlb/miami-marlins/article251742538.html	Newspaper publication that is independent	Yes	Yes	✔ 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) 09:55, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

---

10.

1. Article = Ehmiat
2. Article titles = OK
3. Images copyright = Fair use of company logo
4. NPOV = No, reads like PR: "The organization has been delivering cost-effective web solutions to clients since 2020" "Ehmiat skilled web developers are perfectly equipped to help build powerful, easy-to-use tools, improve Startups and high tech companies workflow"
5. COI / PAID = Not stated, but possible COI (author username is identical to CEO of company)
6. COPYVIO = No
7. Article Class = Stub
8. Short Descr = Web Development Company
9. Categories = Information technology companies, Web development
10. Review = G11, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ehmiat&oldid=1026429147
11. Reason (for v) = Fail of WP:GNG and WP:NCORP. Written like a brochure.
12. Sources

Source assessment table:
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/ehmiat	User-generated as per WP:RSP	Not reliable as per WP:RSP	Yes	✘ No
https://www.bing.com/search?q=Ehmiat	? Literally just bing search results for the company name	? -	? -	? Unknown
https://connect.switchpitch.com/company/266963	user-generated pitch website for companies	user-generated pitch website for companies	? Just trivial information about the company	✘ No
https://startupill.com/101-innovative-web-development-startups-worth-a-follow-in-2021/	Apparent black hat seo site	Apparent black hat seo site	Just a mention in a list of 10 obscure startups	✘ 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. Good. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:55, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Creating article

Please create an article in via Wikipedia:Articles for creation (not via NPP. Ping me when you have done so I may review it) 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; however, you still need to provide significant coverage of independent, relaiable sources to suppor the content.

Answer: Draft:Natalia Alekhina

Y. See Natalia Alekhina. Do remember to add "WikiProject]] on the article talk page. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:55, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

---

Nearlyevil665, See assignment 10 above and Final Exam will follow after this assignment. Ping me when you have done.00:15, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Nearlyevil665, If the any articles do not pass GNG or SGN then indicated what you will do with the article (under "Review"). You can choose AfD, PROP, BLP PROP, CSD, Merge and pls provide the hist diff. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:06, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, hist diff of what exactly? Am I expected to actually do an AfD if I believe that is what I would have done during the NPP? P.S the draft is ready at Draft:Natalia Alekhina. nearlyevil665 10:14, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Nearlyevil665, That is correct. Same as when you review an article via NPP. If the article pass the GNG then, we marked review, if not then we either PROP, BLP PROP, AFD or nominated for merge and when you do that pls provide the hist diff for the nomination. Let me know if this is not clear to you. Cassiopeia^(talk) 20:17, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, I'm done. #7 was speedy deleted before I could open AfD. If needed I can make another article instead of this. nearlyevil665 06:53, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Nearlyevil665, Kindly provide a new #7 answer/page and also there is one more question 10.2 "Creating article" which you nee to create an article in "AfC / draft space" and once you have finish it (dont submit for review), ping me. (The draft article need to notable, content supported by significant coverage of independent, reliable source (at least 5-7 sources-inline citation), place all relevant categories in the page and WikiProject in the draft article page. use appropriate infobox (see Wikipedia:List of infoboxes). The draft article needs to be at least a start class. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:47, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, I'm done. The draft is at Draft:Natalia Alekhina.nearlyevil665 19:50, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, I hope all is well on your end. Not to be pushy or anything but was wondering when to expect the next assignment, as I'm super excited for the final exam! nearlyevil665 19:25, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Nearlyevil665, Sorry for the delay and thanks for reminding me. Will set aside some time tmrw to review the assignment. Cassiopeia^(talk) 08:19, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Cassiopeia, thanks a bunch! nearlyevil665 11:56, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Nearlyevil665, see above comments. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09

56, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

---

Final Exam

Part 1

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

• Answer: Very rarely is there actual malicious intent. Most of the mistakes or errors in editors' edits occur because they either misunderstood the rules or have never been informed of said rules. We need to assume good faith and not attack editors because we were all at some point newcomers, and there's nothing worse to be done to scare off potential editors by scaring them away with personal attacks or accessing them of bad faith. We should instead be polite and guide them with our experience.

Y You forgot to answer part 1 question (how to we communication with an editor). The reasons we communicate editor (new or experienced editors) to educated/support/collaborate/discussion/explore certain issues/concern/subject in Wikipedia in a friendly/civil/polite and constructive constructive manners.

Sometimes we can also communicate a particular issues on WP:WikiProject of a specific subject - see here the list of WikiProject Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. We communicate with other editors if we have would like to change/add new Wikipedia guideliens at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). We also use Wikipedia talk page to communicate with other editors on certain specific Wikipedia page such as Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol, Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk and many more. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:10, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

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

• Answer: Sources need to be verifiable so that anyone can validate it. It should also be independent which means not connected or affiliated with the subject in any form. It should be reliable which means that there should be no doubts about the integrity and trustworthiness of the source. Sources should also be covering the subject with significant coverage instead of trivial or run-off-the-mill coverage. These requirements are in place because without them articles could be created on nearly anything on Wikipedia and there would be no benchmark through which to filter notability of the subjects.

Y. Good. Sources that is WP:IS, WP:RS and WP:SIGCOV must be present to make a source count towards a subject's notability. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:10, 3 July 2021 (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: COPYVIO is the act of copying material that is not public domain or compatibly licensed, including photos that are not licensed under the proper copyright license. It might not be a COPYVIO if the text copied is from a public domain or is a brief quotation. Also it is ok to copy materials from a primary source that is in the public domain like the Declaration of Independence.

Y.Good. See here for how long a copyrighted protection last under United States law. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:10, 3 July 2021 (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: If there's nothing left to salvage than G12. If yes, then use REVDEL. We can than use Twinkle to place a warning on the editor's talk page and notify them about their copyright issue edits.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 08:32, 18 July 2021 (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: If the editor has not willingly disclosed as per Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure and there is an obvious paid editing going on, then we can move the page to draft and notify the editor through Twinkle that they should adhere to WP:PAID and that they are strongly discouraged to push articles into mainspace.

Y In regardless the PAID willingness to Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure; we "MUST" move the page to draft space if it has not been reviewed by AfC reveiwer/patroller. All PAID editors' articles, regardless how many articles they have successfully created and the articles have been reviewed by both AfC and NPP reviewers in the past, must still go through 2 step reviewing processes (review by AfC then NPP patrollers). If the reviewers hold both AfC and NPP reviewer user rights then once the articles are reviewed by the reviewer, the article will be placed in main space. The 2 step reviewing process is designed so that (1) the articles are properly reviewed by more than one reviewer and (2) to limit the possibility of NPP reviewer who are a WP:SOCK who helps their friends' or their own articles to be reviewed and placed in main space. Secondly, we place message on their talk page and inform them they have to disclose their PAID status on the article talk page and their own user page. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:10, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

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

• Answer: G12 when there is nothing to salvage and REVDEL when there is non-copyrighted version to revert to.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:10, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

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

• Answer: G11 it. Possibly also sift through the editor's other contributions as from experience they try to rack up necessary edits to push an article into mainspace by unconstructive edits (which might need reverting) or have other PROMO pages/edits created in the past.

Y. You forgot part 1 question. (The question is a 2 part question). PROMO articles are written either exclusively to promote a product, an organisation, a person, a viewpoint etc or written in a more subtle way, but it still resembles in the way the article is written (too much information about the products, for example, or a lot of subject background (especially singers/DJs/musicians and yet the subjects are not notable under WP:NMUSIC and etc.). Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:10, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

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

• Answer: We tag a page to notify other editors and readers that there is some sort of problem that needs to be addressed with the page. The usual tags left on articles are on NPOV, one source only, notability uncertain, stylistic improvements needed, need of an update to reflect new events and so on.

Y. Tagging allows other editors to fix problems. It is always a good practice and if you know how to, fix the issues yourself instead of tagging. yourself. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:10, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

9. When do we WP:R2 a page?

• Answer: We R2 when we believe there is hope that the page can be edited/references added to potentially become admissible under Wikipedia's rules for mainspace. This should be used carefully and not as a knee-jerk alternative to deletion.

Y. R2 happens is to move from on namespace to another. Here (reviewing a new page via NPP), we mainly talk about moving a new article from main space (new page) to draft and request the the move from a admin where we nominate the page for R2. Note: use R2 sparingly. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:10, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

10. When do we WP:PROD a page?

• Answer: We use PROD when CSD doesn't apply and there is no expectation that the deletion would be contested by anyone.

Y. We PROD a page if it doesn't pass the notability guidelines (both general and specific), doesn't meet any of CSD criteria and we believe the deletion would not be controversial - no one will object. If the tag survives 7 days and a reviewing administrator agrees - it will be deleted. If someone objects to PROD (removing the PROD tag) we can NOT PROD the same article again. Thus do check the history page of the article prior requesting a PROD. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:10, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

11. When do we WP:BLPPROD a page?

• Answer: We use BLPPROD when a BLP has no sources at all.

Y. If there are links in External links section or anywhere else – we can't use BLPPROD. Also bothe BLPROD and PROD is lasted seven day unless a source is added to BLPROD article then the tag can be removed. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:10, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

12. When do we WP:AfD a page?

• Answer: We AfD a page when we believe the subject is not in line with notability requirements but expect opposition to the deletion request.

Y. At times CSD/PROD/BLPROD is not applicable to a new article but we believe the article violates the Wikipedia notability guidelines then we could nominate the article for deletion (AfD) after we do a WP:BEFORE to ensure WP:N is not met. This will trigger a discussion for 7 days where editors can discuss whether . Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:10, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

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

• Answer: CSD is reserved for blatant violations such as copyright and promotion as well as some which might require immediate admin response (such as negative bio of a child, threat pages, revenge porn, and so on) so it is imperative to use it as soon as possible.

Y. CSDs are strict criteria under which the articles can be deleted speedily by admins without discussion and consensus. So it's not only remove problematic or offensive content from Wikipedia but it is also important to CSD such articles to avoid possible legal issues (if it's a copyvio), or promo page as Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia and not a advertising/promo sites. It also to reduce the time on deletion discussions (as such articles have no chance to survive the discussion). But it's important to apply CSD properly. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:10, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

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

• Answer: We R2 when there is reasonable belief that the page might pass notability in the future if properly edited and sources provided, we PROD when we don't expect any opposition to the deletion request and we BLPPROD when a BLP has no sources at all.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:10, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

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

• Answer i: Don't take anything personal as there might be non-English sources out there that you could never find on your own. Remember that there is no 'successful' AfD from the point of the nominator as the end goal is not to delete but find a community consensus.

Y. It might not be a "consensus" vote for the outcome of an AfD (sometimes WP:SOCK and MEAT editors would vote a particle AfD article to be kept where by the article is clearly fails the NOTBILITY guidelines), but they discussion should be base don Wikipedia guidelines (especially Notability guidelines). The editor/admin who close the AfD should read all the discussions and know the Wikipedia guidelines to judge should the AfD article be deleted/kept/merged/redirected/drafted.

• Answer ii: Be civil and polite with people who might take offense for their article getting nominated. Be cordial and explain in detail why you think the nomination is justified. Use source assessment tables for a more profound impact of your arguments when the case requires it. Such as was the case here: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Madis_Eek

Y WELL-DONE on the AfD by using the notability template/table to illustrate the source qualification of the subject and communicate in such a civil and polite manner. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:10, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

• Answer iii: Always try to do extensive WP:BEFORE and even then note in your nomination that you might have missed some non-English sources, especially if there is reasonable belief that such sources might exist.

Y Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:10, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

• Answer iv: Sockpuppets/meatpuppets are a thing! Be careful with taking arguments or sources at face value and analyze them very carefully. While these types of activities are usually blatant and easy to spot there are cases when bad-faith editors might go to great lengths to fabricate or create illusion of notability (I've had a case when an UPE created a page for a non-notable person and used sources about a person who shared the same name.)

Y Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:10, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

• Answer v: When confronted with a reply that you are not sure of, don't go on the defensive and instead wait for more experienced editors to chime in.

Y Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:10, 3 July 2021 (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:

Wekan, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Nearlyevil665/CSD_log&oldid=1029175240

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:39, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

• Answer ii:

Draft:Ayush Shah, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Nearlyevil665/CSD_log&oldid=1029024092

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:39, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

• Answer iii:

Draft:Beautyb, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Nearlyevil665/CSD_log&oldid=1029312181

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:39, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

• Answer iv:

Draft:Cootz, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Nearlyevil665/CSD_log&oldid=1028724900

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:39, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

• Answer v:

Draft:David Sikhosana, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Nearlyevil665/CSD_log&oldid=1028564783

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:39, 28 June 2021 (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:

GoWISE USA Air Fryer Reviews, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Nearlyevil665/CSD_log&oldid=1028567268

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:35, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

• Answer ii:

Draft:Nouiri mohamed, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Nearlyevil665/CSD_log&oldid=1028739135

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:35, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

• Answer iii:

Draft:Asian News Network, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Nearlyevil665/CSD_log&oldid=1028744692

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:35, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

• Answer iv:

Draft:Oyindamola Adejumo Ayibiowu, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Nearlyevil665/CSD_log&oldid=1028863612

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:35, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

• Answer v:

Draft:Y4D Foundation, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Nearlyevil665/CSD_log&oldid=1029002639

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:35, 28 June 2021 (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:

The Ninety-Nines, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Nearlyevil665/CSD_log&oldid=1028563534

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:10, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

• Answer ii:

Thomas Charles Cooke, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Nearlyevil665/CSD_log&oldid=1028563858

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:10, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

• Answer iii:

Victor Robert Bennett, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Nearlyevil665/CSD_log&oldid=1028565232

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:10, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

• Answer iv:

Jairus Inc., https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Nearlyevil665/CSD_log&oldid=1028522420

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:10, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

• Answer v:

Draft:Brandyn Evershed, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&logid=118473137

N. Nominate for A1-A7. You moved the article from mainspace to draft instead. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:10, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Part 5

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

Answer i: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Essential_Islam&oldid=1028725042, notability unclear, no references when PRODed, WP:BEFORE brought up nothing. After nomination three references were added, which only mention the organization in passing in the context of a handbook that they had released. Hist diff Essential Islam.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 07:14, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

• Answer ii: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bent_Creek_Country_Club&oldid=1029551641, nothing to suggest notability as per Wikipedia:GNG or WP:SIGCOV.

Hist diff Bent Creek Country Club

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 07:14, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

2. Nominate 1 article for WP:BLPROD and state your reasons. Answer i: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lilit_Haroyan&oldid=1028673359, No references, WP:BEFORE brought up only primary sources. The text mentioned that she is best known for playing in Full House TV series, but that article said she had only played in one season with an apparent minor role. The tag was removed and three references added, one of which is IMDB, second is just an announcement of a TV series she is starring in, and third is run-off-the-mill coverage of her uploading pictures on her Instagram. Page is an AfD candidate for sure. Hist diff Lilit Haroyan

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 07:14, 4 July 2021 (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: Automate (System), I cannot get the hist diff for this for some reason, it's not in my CSD log either. But it was me who put the R2 tag on it.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 07:14, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

• Answer ii: Pavlina Mani, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pavlina_Mani&oldid=1031229028

Hist diff Pavlina Mani

Y. Cassiopeia talk 01:52, 24 February 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/Alfredo Silva, WP:BEFORE turned up nothing, only primary sources or run-off-the-mill coverage during his performance in America's Got Talent.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 08:31, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

• Answer ii:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oliver's Ghost, non-notable film, nothing comes up on WP:BEFORE, not a pass of WP:GNG or WP:NFILM.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 08:31, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

• Answer iii

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chaudhari Kumbharam Arya, pass of Wikipedia:POLITICIAN as he was a Member of Parliament.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 08:31, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

• Answer iv:
  Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Technique Recordings, Non-notable record label. WP:BEFORE turns up nothing other than primary sources or interviews

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 08:31, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

• Answer v:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cooper Brannan (2nd nomination), Not a pass of WP:NBASEBALL. Coverage is trivial or local. Has coverage on CBS news and Fox Sports for making a pitch in Major League but these do not constitute a pass of WP:GNG.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 08:31, 18 July 2021 (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/Diffractor (software), no coverage in multiple reliable sources. References are either primary sources or websites with unclear reliability. Could not find coverage of this software anywhere other than review or download sites.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 08:31, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

• Answer ii:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dibya Ranjan Giri (author), only primary sources in article, WP:BEFORE brought up nothing to pass WP:GNG, no confirmed awards or achievements to pass WP:NAUTHOR.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 08:31, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

• Answer iii:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Broxi Bear, Not a pass of WP:GNG to warrant a stand-alone article.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 08:31, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

• Answer iv:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adani Cement, Run-off-the-mill coverage all around of sources covering its entry into the market. Nothing to suggest significant coverage throughout multiple independent sources. I proposed a delete or possibly merge with Adani Group.

Y I would agree with delete as the subsidiary just incorporate very recently and not enough IRS to support the merge.08:31, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

• Answer v:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Circle of Life (album), Fail of WP:NALBUM. Nothing to demonstrate pass of WP:GNG either. Not charted anywhere.

Y voted redirect. Cassiopeia^(talk) 08:31, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Part 8

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

• Answer i: Make sure the article title is correct and doesn't need to be adjusted as per Wikipedia:Article titles, if anything needs to be adjusted then just make the move or request one

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:37, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

• Answer ii: Place tags if the article is missing citations or needs some cleanup or fix the problem yourself if capable

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:37, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

• Answer iii: Check any page images to make sure their copyright is in order as per Wikipedia:IMAGEPOLICY, use Google reverse image search to quickly check if the photo exists elsewhere. If a violation is found then follow Wikipedia:Guide to image deletion

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:37, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

• Answer iv: If the article looks promising and the subject notable but it blatantly needs a lot of work to be ready to mainspace, then move to draftspace

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:37, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

• Answer v: If the subject isn't notable (but not CSD nominee) and is most likely not to be contested then make a PROD (or BLPROD if its a BLP without any source)

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:37, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

• Answer vi: If the page qualifies for CSD categories then nominate it for the proper one

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:37, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

• Answer vii: Review the Wikiprojects and add the relevant ones if missing

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:37, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

• Answer viii: Check to see if an article on the subject exists on another language wiki (for example if it's a page about a Russian Chess Grandmaster then it most likely already has a page on Russian wiki). Make sure it is not an unattributed translation. Link the EN to the RU version and any other language wiki for the same subject.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:37, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

• Answer xi: Use Copyvio to see if there is any content copyright. Use REVDEL if there is something to revert to. If not, use CSD G11 and request deletion.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:37, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

• Answer x: Check to see if the page was previously deleted through AfD or CSD or PROD/BLPPROD. Also check if the author is not blocked and the page created through block evasion.

Y. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:37, 3 July 2021 (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 = Andrey Andreychenko
2. Article titles = Correct
3. Images copyright = Properly attributed CCA 4.0 as shown on duma's official site
4. NPOV = No obvious NPOV issues, but there are unsourced biographical entries about him (for example the education section). Tag for verification already exists.
5. COI / PAID = No
6. COPYVIO = No (talk page attributes translation from RU wiki)
7. Article Class = Start
8. Short Descr = Russian politician, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Andrey_Andreychenko&oldid=1029645893
9. Categories = Categories provided are sufficient
10. Review = Yes
11. Reason (for 10) = Member of Duma, hence pass of Wikipedia:NPOLITICIAN
12. WikiProject = Sufficient projects (Russia and BLP)
13. Sources

Source assessment table:
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://ria.ru/20130708/948187681.html	Russian news outlet. While independence and reliability might be under question for contentious political and societal topics, this source is usable for non-contentious news. In this case this is news of the subject running for mayor.	Same as above	Yes, covering subject running for mayor in 2013	✔ Yes
https://ria.ru/20170524/1494978633.html	Same as first source.	Same as first source.	News confirming the person filled in the MP mandate after the seat was made vacant in 2017.	✔ Yes
https://primamedia.ru/news/707060/	Russian news outlet	Russian news outlet, reliability not under question for non-contentious news	Yes, covers the subject's nomination for Governor in 2018	✔ Yes
https://novayagazeta-vlad.ru/458/politika/strasti-po-andreyam.html	Yes	Yes	General news about the Governor's elections results in 2018, mentions the subject's results as well as other candidates	✘ No
https://novayagazeta-vlad.ru/458/politika/strasti-po-andreyam.html	Yes	Yes	Nothing about the subject, not even a mention of him, this is just news that the Governor's elections second round were invalidated	✘ No
https://tass.ru/politika/5722729	Yes	Yes	Another reliable site confirming that the subject was nominated by the party for Governorship in 2018	✔ 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) 07:21, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

2

2.

1. Article = Alan Smith (geneticist)
2. Article titles = Proper title
3. Images copyright = N/A
4. NPOV = None
5. COI / PAID = No
6. COPYVIO = No
7. Article Class = Stub
8. Short Descr = https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alan_Smith_(geneticist)&oldid=1029648871
9. Categories = Proper categories already in place
10. Review = Yes
11. Reason (for 10) = Fellow of the Royal Society, hence a pass of Wikipedia:NACADEMICS#3
12. WikiProject = Genetics, BLP, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Alan_Smith_(geneticist)&oldid=1029649119
13. Sources

Source assessment table:
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
"Smith, Alan Edward, (born 9 Oct. 1945), Senior Vice President, Research, 1989–2011 and Chief Scientific Officer, 1996–2011, Genzyme Corporation, Cambridge, Mass; Lady Margaret Beaufort Fellow, Christ’s College, Cambridge, since 2012." WHO'S WHO & WHO WAS WHO. 1 Dec. 2010	? Cannot access this document	? Cannot access this document	? Cannot access this document, but presumably this confirms his positions	? Unknown
https://arecor.com/about-arecor/board-of-directors/	Company website	? Company website, but useful to confirm subject is working there	? Just a small paragraph on the subject among other board of directors members	✘ No
https://royalsociety.org/people/alan-smith-12311/	Royal Society website	Royal Society website	Confirms he is a Royal Society Fellow, which qualifies him as per WP:NACADEMIC#3	✔ 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 own web site or associated web site is considered not independent source. Cassiopeia^(talk) 07:24, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

3

3.

1. Article = Andrey Ishchenko
2. Article titles = Correct title
3. Images copyright = Properly attributed CCA 4.0 as shown on duma's official site
4. NPOV = No obvious NPOV, but unsourced sections. Proper tag already applied.
5. COI / PAID = No
6. COPYVIO = None. Proper attribution of RU wiki translation on talk page.
7. Article Class = Start
8. Short Descr = Proper short desc - Russian politician
9. Categories = Categories are in order
10. Review = Yes
11. Reason (for 10) = Member of parliament in the Legislative Assembly of Primorsky Krai, hence a pass of Wikipedia:NPOLITICIAN
12. WikiProject = Proper projects already assigned (Russia and BLP)
13. Sources

Source assessment table:
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
http://www.zspk.gov.ru/deputy/93350/	? Official site of the legislative assembly, so some contentious information might not be usable, but certainly usable for confirming the subject is a member	Reliable for non-contentious information	Yes	? Unknown
http://www.primorsk.vybory.izbirkom.ru/region/izbirkom?action=show&root=252000001&tvd=2252000998272&vrn=2252000998266&prver=0&pronetvd=0&region=25&sub_region=0&type=427&vibid=2252000998272	Official Election Commission site	Results of the elections	? This is just the election results confirming the number of votes he had received	? Unknown
https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/3743969	Yes	Yes	Significant coverage of the subject's performance in the elections for Governor	✔ Yes
http://primorsk.izbirkom.ru/Vybory/2018/povtornoe-golosovanie-na-dosrochnykh-vyborakh-gubernatora-primorskogo-kraya-.php	Election commission website	Election commission website	Nothing to do with the subject, simply a statement that there has been a recall of the elections	✘ 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. Cassiopeia^(talk) 07:32, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

4

4.

1. Article = Zach Thompson (baseball)
2. Article titles = Proper title
3. Images copyright = N/A
4. NPOV = N/A
5. COI / PAID = No
6. COPYVIO = No
7. Article Class = Start
8. Short Descr = Proper short desc - American baseball player
9. Categories = Proper categories already in place
10. Review = Yes
11. Reason (for 10) = Plays in Major League Baseball, pass of Wikipedia:NBASEBALL#2
12. WikiProject = Already has proper projects
13. Sources

Source assessment table:
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://utamavs.com/news/2014/6/6/BSB_Three_Mavericks_selected_on_Day_2_of_MLB_Draft.aspx	Mavericks site, so useful for confirming trivial and performance data	Mavericks site, so useful for confirming trivial and performance data	Mentions him amongst other players selected for MLB draft	✘ No
https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=thomps002zac	Baseball stats site	Baseball stats site	Yes, confirms his pitch appearances and stats	✔ Yes
https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2020/06/2020-minor-league-season-will-be-canceled.html	? Unclear, title has rumours in them	? Unclear, title has rumours in them	Nothing about the subject	? Unknown
https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2020/12/minor-mlb-transactions-12320-2.html	? Unclear, title has rumours in them	? Unclear, title has rumours in them	Just trivial mention of the subject through a tweet	✘ No
https://www.miamiherald.com/sports/mlb/miami-marlins/article251922118.html	Yes	Yes	Just trivial mention of the 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}}.

Y. www.mlbtraderumors- I would considered the site is not reliable - see here. Cassiopeia^(talk) 07:47, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

5

5.

1. Article = Arun Ghosh
2. Article titles = Correct
3. Images copyright = N/A
4. NPOV = N/A
5. COI / PAID = No
6. COPYVIO = No
7. Article Class = Stub
8. Short Descr = Indian footballer, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Arun_Ghosh&oldid=1029666089
9. Categories = Added 1964 AFC Asian Cup players; Year of birth missing (living people); India international footballers https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Arun_Ghosh&oldid=1029666394
10. Review = Yes
11. Reason (for 10) = Played in India's team in Olympics, hence a pass of Wikipedia:Notability (sports)
12. WikiProject = Added India, BLP and Football: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Arun_Ghosh&oldid=1029666453
13. Sources

Source assessment table:
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/sports/football/top-stories/still-get-goosebumps-remembering-1962-asian-games-football-gold-arun-ghosh/articleshow/77930006.cms	Independent publication	Reliable	Yes, covers the subject during his time in the Asian Games in 1962	✔ Yes
https://www.transfermarkt.co.in/arun-ghosh/profil/spieler/480539	? Unclear, most likely not	? Unclear, most likely not	Simply shows his stats and confirms he played for India during Olympics	? Unknown
https://www.sportskeeda.com/football/greatest-indian-football-xi-of-all-time	? Unclear	? Unclear, tilting more to unreliable	Just a trivial mention of the subject in a list of many former players	✘ 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. /www.sportskeeda.com is not a reliable site. Articles can be submitted by register users - see here point #3. Cassiopeia^(talk) 08:50, 4 July 2021 (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:Marina Niyazgulova

Y - see Marina Niyazgulova. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:03, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

---

Nearlyevil665, See Final exam above. All the best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 10:01, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA, I'm done! Check at your earliest convenience! nearlyevil665 11:09, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Nearlyevil665, Thank you for informing. Cassiopeia^(talk) 22:56, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA, Hi, I understand you are mid-review. Was just wondering if I could change an answer in of the parts that is yet to be reviewed and marked for a score? nearlyevil665 06:54, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Nearlyevil665, yes, you may. Cassiopeia^(talk) 07:02, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA, I'm done, feel free to review at your earliest discretion! nearlyevil665 13:31, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Nearlyevil665, Could you pls provide hist diff of the creator talk page (when Twinkle placed the PROD/BLPPROD of your nomination. Ping me when you have provided the hist diffs. Cassiopeia^(talk) 05:35, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA, unfortunately I just realized I had the "Keep a log in userspace of all pages you tag for PROD" disabled in my Twinkle preferences. Is there a way I can still retrieve those? nearlyevil665 05:54, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Nearlyevil665, What I meant was when we CSD/PROD/BLPPROD a page, vis Twinkle, the system will generate a notification message to the creator of the nomination. So if we know the creator name then we could find the notification from you to the creator on their talk page. I have able to locate 3 out of 4. Some how the I can find Automate (System) hist diff on anywhere. There is a way to see the PROD tag with a user script but my JavaScript console on my browser which have some error and I could not find the tag info. Anyway, I will take the Automate System was your R2.06:44, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA, ah, I get it now, I misunderstood. Yes, I also see that 3 out of 4 have my message on their talk page. I'm not sure why the fourth one is lacking such a tag but I was certainly the one who tagged it! Let me know if you need any additional clarification. nearlyevil665 06:51, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA, hi, unfortunately I'm very ill and have limited access to Wikipedia so please don't think that I'm inactive or anything if you have any questions on the last part. nearlyevil665 11:37, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Nearlyevil665, Thank you for informing and I am so sorry to hear that you are not well. Take all the rest you need and take good care of yourself. I am waiting for all the AfDs to be closed prior review the last 2 parts. Take good care of yourself and Stay safe. Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:23, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA, thanks for the wishes, I'm feeling better now and slowly regaining strength. I noticed the last AfD was finally closed today - took only nearly an entire month! nearlyevil665 17:32, 15 July 2021 (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 93%. 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.

@Nearlyevil665: 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) 08:43, 18 July 2021 (UTC)