Draft talk:Gumn

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WP:Notability[edit]

Hey User:Saqib, care to elaborate on what grounds you declined the draft?182.182.97.3 (talk) 22:09, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've already explained the reasoning over there. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 22:11, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Jang, The Nation (Pakistan) are not reliable, secondary or independent? 182.182.97.3 (talk) 22:15, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey User:S0091, you said there should be reliable sources for an article to be published. What about this draft? Multiple sources that meets WP:GNG, still declined, Why? 182.182.97.3 (talk) 22:17, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Instead of asking me to determine which source is reliable or not, you need to provide sourcing here. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 22:18, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[1],[2] are these not reliable? 182.182.97.3 (talk) 22:23, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As @S0091 mentioned earlier, it doesn't meet the four criteria listed at WP:GNG. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 22:29, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Which criteria it doesn't meet? 182.182.97.3 (talk) 22:30, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey User:Drmies, can you please review the articles as I feel User:Saqib has been biased in exercising his judgment as articles does meet WP:GNG as required for a TV show. You can compare the referencing with any Netflix based series. 182.182.97.3 (talk) 10:50, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As far as this Draft is concerned, Do you think Dawn (Newspaper) and The Nation (newspaper) are not reliable? 182.182.97.3 (talk) 10:53, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Despite others explaining to this IP here and here, they persist in WP:BLUDGEONING their point. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 11:28, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You are WP:BLUDGEONING and removing sources from the article, are you afraid that it might get accepted for publication? Let it be how's it then. 182.182.97.3 (talk) 11:58, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Daniel Case: I believe 182.182.97.3 (talk · contribs · 182.182.97.3 WHOIS) should also be blocked from editing this draft because they repeatedly request reviews without making any single edits, let alone improvements. Their tedious editing is wasting our time. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 11:13, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because multiple administrators have said that the draft meet WP:GNG but you are biased while reviewing my draft. User:Daniel Case, I have mentioned the issue on WP:Teahouse as well. Kindly provide a solution or let this draft review by any other administrator other than User:Saqib. 182.182.97.3 (talk) 11:23, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you provide diff of admin stating that this draft is acceptable? And just for clarity, I'm fine with anyone reviewing this. I don't have any objections. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 11:30, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
User_talk:Drmies#BeauSuzanne Here, Just check. And even after you removed crap sources which are not crap, as Youlin Magazine is a reliable, independent published Magazine, Draft have enough sources to be accepted. 182.182.97.3 (talk) 11:55, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just because a magazine has a WP page doesn't automatically make it WP:RS. And as for @Drmies, I haven't seen them call the draft acceptable. Since you've reinstated non-RS in the draft, I view it as WP:DISRUPTIVE. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 12:22, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok even if Youlin Magazine isn't considered, there are reliable sources left behind. And User:Drmies have said that sourcing isn't worse as you've declined it on the basis of WP:RS 182.182.97.3 (talk) 12:24, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
User:Liz, User:ToadetteEdit, User:Drmies, User:S0091 Hey you all, can any of you guys review my draft as an independent reviewer? I will happily accept the outcome based on your judgements. 182.182.97.3 (talk) 12:29, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You gotta show some coverage here that meet WP:SIRS to help establish WP:GNG. WP:COMPETENCE is definitely missing. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 12:31, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If the draft have 3-4 sources that covers WP:RS and establish WP:SIRS along with sources that covers the subject in-depth. 182.182.97.3 (talk) 12:36, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd rather not respond because you engaged in WP:FORUMSHOP against me repeatedely. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 12:43, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Still you're interested in reviewing and declining my drafts. 182.182.97.3 (talk) 12:45, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely because too much harm's been done by UPEs, but starting now, I'd like to ensure we keep unwarranted pages away from WP. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 12:50, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know about the UPEs and their damages, I'm concerned with my drafts only specifically this one cause I'm quite sure that it meets WP:Notability. 182.182.97.3 (talk) 12:55, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Anyway, I don't feel like arguing with you because I have other tasks to handle as well. Since you've tagged others and asked them to review the draft, let's wait for their input. But I have to say, your sourcing is really lacking. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 13:00, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, Let others decide this. Apologies, if you felt disprespected. 182.182.97.3 (talk) 13:13, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Saqib, just leave their drafts be. You turned this one down three times; that's enough. IP, stop pinging Saqib and stop complaining about them: it's getting irritating. Drmies (talk) 13:56, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded. I may review the draft but I should really check every source in the draft. ToadetteEdit! 14:12, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just a heads-up, since you're reviewing it. You approved at least two articles from this IP before and they ended up being rejected. So, take extra care when assessing the reliability of sources and then whether coverage in WP:RS meet WP:GNG. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 14:20, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Drmies and ToadetteEdit, I won't. It's just I don't want him to review my drafts. Thank you both of you! 182.182.97.3 (talk) 14:31, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, I won't review this particular draft, but that doesn't mean I won't edit your other drafts. I haven't done anything wrong to deserve a topic or even an interaction ban here- just so you know, I'm a regular on WP:NPP these days. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 14:36, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am more lenient in approving but the additions since last decline shows more unreliable sources in my view. ToadetteEdit! 14:39, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's exactly what I've been saying. Out of 25 references, 20 are clearly non-RS. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 14:44, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I took a super quick look, and immediately noticed that the same article [3], [4] and [5] (along with two or three OTHER sites) is being used as multiple references here. That's a clear sign of a paid article - just reading the intro para it's over-the-top promotional. It shows that there's not much editorial review of the sources being done by the IP article creator, just spamming it with everything that shows up on a web search. Yeah, this will need very careful review of the sources. Ravensfire (talk) 14:49, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's also broad statements in the reception section ("Gumn received positive reviews for its mysterious plot and thrill") sourced to a single review, no source for the next line which is generally not something you'd see in a reception section. The last line in the reception section is another broad statement that's not supported by sources. Definite POV issues here. Is this a notable show? Probably, but this draft does need attention. Ravensfire (talk) 14:52, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It can be tagged for clean up in that case, but saying it doesn't meet WP:Notability is not right. 182.182.97.3 (talk) 14:58, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As someone from Pakistan - I can tell you for sure this show isn't all that notable or even popular. It's just getting some WP:ROTM coverage. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 14:59, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As someone from Pakistan - Sarmad Sultan Khoosat has made it to international platforms and have given Oscars submission Joyland (film), the serial is directed by him. 182.182.97.3 (talk) 15:02, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Notability is WP:NOTINHERITED, just because it has notable people as actors or directors is of no weight for determining that, it's the show by itself. Ravensfire (talk) 17:09, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Going through the sources the first dozen or so are casting announcements, interviews and couple or so that are not about Gumn. Many have a generic role byline of Newsdesk or Webdesk. The Image.Dawn article is in the comments section so user generated content so not reliable.
  • The Brown Identity describes itself as "he Brown Identity is a space for everyone to talk about what they like, don’t like, what they wish they could talk about without worrying about fitting into pigeonholes." so WP:UGC
  • Siddy Says is a WP:blog so WP:USG
  • Gloss Etc. is a WP:blog so WP:USG
  • irfanistan.net WP:blog so WP:USG (also note copyright stamp is date 2021 and the About and Contact pages do not exist)
  • Fuchsia Magazine is not WP:RS see WP:NPPSG
  • People Magazine is not WP:RS and not sure it is even still operating at any real extent. Their Home page has articles from back in 2023 with most being written by the same author Neyha Saeed and note the copyright is dated 2021.
The only one that might be WP:RS and might meet WP:GNG is Youlin Magazine, a review by Hurmat Majid, who is a journalist. S0091 (talk) 15:04, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, What about [6] and [7], these 2 I believe meets WP:GNG. And I'll add more local languages sources. 182.182.97.3 (talk) 15:08, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Cheeku/IP, please cleanup all the cruft sources before adding more. S0091 (talk) 15:13, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The first cannot pass GNG as it does not discusses the series but about oneof their actors. The second one may meet GNG, but focuses on an actor instead. ToadetteEdit! 15:13, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Those are press releases/casting announcements with role by-lines like Web Desk or Staff Report. S0091 (talk) 15:15, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Cast of the project, what should the sources related to TV shows should be about? Even if you consider all the sources you can extract 3-4 sources meeting WP:GNG. 182.182.97.3 (talk) 15:17, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ip, it feels that none of the sources are reliable and thus, the draft may be rejected as non notable. Cast announcements are routine business and should be avoided. ToadetteEdit! 15:21, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Casting announcements are based on press releases which are primary sources and not independent so cannot be used to establish notability but fine to use for WP:V. And no, I cannot extract 3-4 sources that meet GNG. I only see one potential. S0091 (talk) 15:22, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But you said above that you'd accept the review of an uninvolved editor. Toadette has reviewed—why are you still insisting? And who will review those local language sources for you? I doubt these English-speaking folks can handle it. You've already wasted enough time, please stop. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:27, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have accepted ToadetteEdit review. I aim to improve it in terms of referencing. Thank you all for your interest and Sorry for taking the time. 182.182.97.3 (talk) 15:34, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Cheeku, it's better to have a handful or so good sources than 20+ bad ones. For example a couple so that meet WP:GNG and a couple or so that meet WP:RS but not necessarily GNG to fill in any gaps the GNG ones do not cover. Not all TV shows will be able meet WP:N but that's ok. Just because a TV show does not meet Wikipedia's notability has no bearing on its value. S0091 (talk) 15:57, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But don't overlook the fact that Youlin Magazine also engage in publishing sensational stories which is akin to WP:CHURNALISM. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:19, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe but a review an author's opinion. Hurmat Majid has written for Dawn, Express Tribune and others. I'm not saying it is the strongest WP:RS but I'd count it as GNG even if weak unless there's reason to believe it's paid or something like that. S0091 (talk) 15:29, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft Deletion[edit]

Hey User:Saqib, I feel the draft should be deleted as I'm unable to find more reliable sources that meets WP:GNG. It doesn't makes sense keeping it in draft space. 182.182.29.217 (talk) 19:16, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with deleting this draft. It should be kept because you're not the only contributor and since we have a discussion on this tp, it makes sense to keep this draft. It might be helpful in the future. If you feel you have nothing more to contribute to this page, do not edit to this draft. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:21, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Daniel Case: Check the page history, this IP keeps adding speedy tags, which is clearly disruptive. --—Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:23, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have added it to their block. Daniel Case (talk) 19:26, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft_talk:Gumn&oldid=1223080241"