User talk:Phantomsteve/Archives/2018/June
Why delete a Wiki page someone created about me?
editHello Phantom Steve,
My name is Nigel Clarke and I'm a British Television Presenter and have been for the last 18yrs. I am wondering why you have deleted the Wikipedia page that a fan has obviously created for me? Do you know how many years I have been waiting for someone to put up a Wiki page for me? Many of my friends and collegues have pages as it has become part and parcel of being a prominent role model for the youth that take an interest in what I do. I don't see you deleting pages for Reggie Yates, Anna Williamson, Camilla Dallerup, Sarah Jane Crawford or Michelle Ackerley. All of whom I have Co Hosted TV shows with. You have no idea how difficult it is to stand out in this industry with a name as common as mine. Your callous disregard will have an effect on upcoming work and opportunities I await your explanation
regards
Nigel Clarke — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nigelclarketv (talk • contribs) 19:10, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for contacting me about Nigel Clarke (presenter). The article was deleted as there was insufficient evidence that you meet the criteria for inclusion on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not here "as part and parcel of being a prominent role model" - and whether other people have articles has nothing to do with whether you should have one or not. Someone flagged your article as one that should be considered for deletion - if other presenters' pages were likewise flagged at a time when I was online, I'd look at their articles, and judge whether they met the criteria for inclusion or not.
- When I am looking at an article such as this, I look at the claims to notability, and the references, to see whether there is sufficient evidence that the person in question meets the criteria for inclusion (see the general notability criteria and the guidelines for Actors, voice actors, comedians, opinion makers, models, and celebrities)
- Looking at yours, I looked the references:
- The first reference was to an interview at "Fun Kids" - this appears to be a PR event, and all the information comes from you and/or your PR staff - so not independent sourcing;
- The second reference was showing you as a cast member of Stomp... again, not an independent source, and not indepth information about you or your career.
- The third one was to an article in the Enfield Independent. As a source, this is good - but as this is the only source with anything like independence (and to be honest, it read almost like an advert for the dance studio you saved!), it was not sufficient to justify an entire article about you
- The final one was to the CBBC website, about a programme you are involved in. This is not considered an independent source, and isn't indepth.
- Deletion of your article does not imply that I (or others) disbelieve that you are a presenter, just that we do not feel that you meet the criteria
- Let's look at the criteria for 'entertainers' referred to above:
- Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions.
- Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following.
- Has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment.
- No unless I'm missing a lot of coverage in reliable and independent sources that show that you meet these criteria, then I do not see that you meet them?
- If you feel that I have made a mistake in deleting the article, as what I have said above is an inaccurate summary, then you are welcome to post a message at Wikipedia:Deletion_review - please let them know that you have discussed this with me on this talk page.
- Finally, Wikipedia is not here to help you by having a positive "effect on upcoming work and opportunities" - that is what a PR agency or your management are for, what they get paid for. We exist to cover people who meet our criteria of notability, as outlined above. PhantomSteve/talk¦contribs\ 13:38, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
editNote: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:33, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
The Signpost: 29 June 2018
edit- Special report: NPR and AfC – The Marshall Plan: an engagement and a marriage?
- Op-ed: What do admins do?
- News and notes: Money, milestones, and Wikimania
- In the media: Much wikilove from the Mayor of London, less from Paekākāriki or a certain candidate for U.S. Congress
- Discussion report: Deletion, page moves, and an update to the main page
- Featured content: New promotions
- Arbitration report: WWII, UK politics, and a user deCrat'ed
- Traffic report: Endgame
- Technology report: Improvements piled on more improvements
- Gallery: Wiki Loves Africa
- Recent research: How censorship can backfire and conversations can go awry
- Humour: Television plot lines
- Wikipedia essays: This month's pick by The Signpost editors
- From the archives: Wolves nip at Wikipedia's heels: A perspective on the cost of paid editing