| Revision as of 01:08, 22 June 2021 edit3family6 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Mass message senders, Pending changes reviewers26,677 edits reply← Previous edit |
Revision as of 04:44, 22 June 2021 edit undoSpicy (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Administrators63,418 edits reTag: citing a blog or free web hostNext edit → |
| Line 20: |
Line 20: |
|
:* ] The article is new enough and long enough. Nothing concerning on Earwig's copyvio detector. The hook is interesting and cited in the article; the source (Allmusic) seems adequate for what it's supporting. QPQ is done. However, the article is currently tagged for overreliance on primary sources - this will need to be resolved before the nomination can continue. I have additional concerns about whether some of the sources used are reliable enough for a BLP, e.g. what makes hardrockhaven.net and soniccathedral.com reliable sources? Citing a statement about her political beliefs to an archive of a now defunct blog seems problematic from a BLP standpoint as well. Needs attention to sourcing before it is promoted to DYK. ] (]) 10:23, 21 June 2021 (UTC) |
|
:* ] The article is new enough and long enough. Nothing concerning on Earwig's copyvio detector. The hook is interesting and cited in the article; the source (Allmusic) seems adequate for what it's supporting. QPQ is done. However, the article is currently tagged for overreliance on primary sources - this will need to be resolved before the nomination can continue. I have additional concerns about whether some of the sources used are reliable enough for a BLP, e.g. what makes hardrockhaven.net and soniccathedral.com reliable sources? Citing a statement about her political beliefs to an archive of a now defunct blog seems problematic from a BLP standpoint as well. Needs attention to sourcing before it is promoted to DYK. ] (]) 10:23, 21 June 2021 (UTC) |
|
::*The tag was placed by {{u|Kingoflettuce}}. We discussed this ] and I'm not sure if this was resolved or not. Point taken about the defunct blog for statements from 11 years ago - I'll remove that (which should also help with the SPS concerns). Re: Soniccathedral.com and hardrockhaven.net. Hardrockhaven.net has an , and some of its stories have been linked to by reliable publications such as ] and '']'' (, , ). Soniccathedral.com has an editorial staff but unfortunately doesn't have an accessible list. It's stories, however, are also sometimes republished/linked to by the aforementioned publications (, , - this story then subsequently picked up by ] ).--] (] | ]) 01:07, 22 June 2021 (UTC) |
|
::*The tag was placed by {{u|Kingoflettuce}}. We discussed this ] and I'm not sure if this was resolved or not. Point taken about the defunct blog for statements from 11 years ago - I'll remove that (which should also help with the SPS concerns). Re: Soniccathedral.com and hardrockhaven.net. Hardrockhaven.net has an , and some of its stories have been linked to by reliable publications such as ] and '']'' (, , ). Soniccathedral.com has an editorial staff but unfortunately doesn't have an accessible list. It's stories, however, are also sometimes republished/linked to by the aforementioned publications (, , - this story then subsequently picked up by ] ).--] (] | ]) 01:07, 22 June 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::*] Thanks for the edits. I'm still unsure about the use of primary sources - quite a lot of the article seems to be based on Q&A interviews like this which don't have any real secondary analysis, and some sources, like still seem questionable to me. I do realize it's sort of a niche topic and we can't expect a cover story in the ''New York Times'' or anything... if it's alright I'd like to relist this for a second opinion by someone more familiar with sourcing expectations in this area. Thanks, ] (]) 04:43, 22 June 2021 (UTC) |
|
}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.--> |
|
}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.--> |
The article is new enough and long enough. Nothing concerning on Earwig's copyvio detector. The hook is interesting and cited in the article; the source (Allmusic) seems adequate for what it's supporting. QPQ is done. However, the article is currently tagged for overreliance on primary sources - this will need to be resolved before the nomination can continue. I have additional concerns about whether some of the sources used are reliable enough for a BLP, e.g. what makes hardrockhaven.net and soniccathedral.com reliable sources? Citing a statement about her political beliefs to an archive of a now defunct blog seems problematic from a BLP standpoint as well. Needs attention to sourcing before it is promoted to DYK. Spicy (talk) 10:23, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the edits. I'm still unsure about the use of primary sources - quite a lot of the article seems to be based on Q&A interviews like this which don't have any real secondary analysis, and some sources, like this still seem questionable to me. I do realize it's sort of a niche topic and we can't expect a cover story in the New York Times or anything... if it's alright I'd like to relist this for a second opinion by someone more familiar with sourcing expectations in this area. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 04:43, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
