Talk:Alexander Reichstein

Templates
Vexations - I dream of horses: I would like the Essay and Third-party maintenance templates to be removed from the article. What should happen? --AxelHH (talk) 23:03, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
 * To begin, replace all the references to http://www.reichstein.name with independent, reliable sources. Vexations (talk) 23:19, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Done. --AxelHH (talk) 23:24, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
 * The sources I see now are
 * http://www.lesamisdupalaislumiere.fr which appears to exist in order to promote the Palais: :"Afin de promouvoir cette institution..."
 * https://festival-of-lights.de is run by an event-marketing company, Zander & Partner GmbH
 * https://forschungsmuseum-schoeningen.de is the museum that issued a press release about an "Interactive special exhibition" by Reichstein.
 * https://kaupunginosat.fi I can't quite figure out what this is exactly, but it appears to appear to be a an aggregator, not source that has any kind of editorial control
 * https://lastenkirjainstituutti.fi is a a national center for the promotion of children's literature
 * https://www.moomin.com I suppose Moomin is a brand now, owned by a company.
 * https://www.myhelsinki.fi is run by Helsinki Partners, a city marketing, investment and talent attraction company owned by the City of Helsinki
 * https://www.taike.fi is the Arts Promotion Centre Finland.
 * It's all promotional material. None of these source are independent or reliable per our policies or guidelines. See WP:RS and WP:IS. Vexations (talk) 16:31, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
 * There are no better sources. Why should the sources mentioned not be credible? They usually only mention simple facts, such as the award of a prize or the implementation of an event / exhibition. --AxelHH (talk) 19:08, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Then the subject has not received significant coverage in independent, reliable sources and does not meet the notability criteria of the General notability guideline or the subject-specific notability guideline for Creative professionals. It's not such much that we think the sources you have cited are not credible, it's that nobody who is not associated with him has written about him in a publication that has a reputation for fact-checking, editorial oversight and independence (what we refer to as a WP:RS. Vexations (talk) 20:12, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I understand. You mean a publication by the media, like an article in a reputable newspaper. A report that is not just based on a press release. --AxelHH (talk) 23:25, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
 * In this case, yes, probably newspapers or magazines. While many of Wikipedia's editors would prefer peer-reviewed journal articles (or even better, systematic reviews) over newspapers, the consensus is clearly that factual reporting in major news outlets is acceptable. The Helsingin Sanomat would be a good example of such a source. Vexations (talk) 23:47, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Could this be any easier? And be nice this time.

Google News Alexander+Reichstein

Gonna ask tho: you are not doing PR/media relations for Alexander Reichstein, either paid or unpaid, right? It's OK if you do, you just gotta declare it.

The reason I'm asking is that in the DE.wiki article (other than style and CAT) and here you appear to be the only contributor.

== Peter NYC (talk) 04:30, 14 December 2021 (UTC)


 * As you can see from my profile AxelHH, I have been writing articles for 15 years about things that interest me personally and not to do PR for anything or anyone. There are many articles on Wikipedia that are only written by one author because others are not interested in them. This artist piqued my interest because he is showing an extraordinary exhibition in a museum that I know and that I have already written about in many contexts, such as Forschungsmuseum Schöningen, Schöninger Speere, Waldelefant von Schöningen and Wurfstock von Schöningen. --AxelHH (talk) 15:15, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

""Alexander Reichstein"" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect & and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. SpinningSpark 10:56, 31 December 2022 (UTC)