Talk:Kiff VandenHeuvel

Notability and sourcing
I've re-added the maintenance templates originally added here by, but subsequently removed here by because I don't believe the issues have been sufficiently addressed. While it is true that more sources have been added by 23.242.78.120, it's not necessary the quantity of sources, but rather the respective quality of the sources which matter when it comes to establishing Wikipedia notability. Interviews, podcasts, etc. may be acceptable to some degree for verifying certain article content as explained in WP:BLPSELFPUB, but they are primary sources and primary sources are not helpful at all in establishing Wikipedia notability per WP:BASIC. What is needed are examples of significant coverage in reliable sources which are independent of the subject matter. Listings like this, this and this as well as promotional pieces like this and this are not really helpful at all when it comes to Wikipedia notability. What is needed are more sources like this, perhaps a little more national in scope, to show that VandenHeuvel at least meets WP:NACTOR. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:01, 14 October 2016 (UTC)