Talk:Natalie Draper

Notability tag
This is a new article posted today. In looking through the references, I see a lot of local and school press, but I'm not clear on the basis for establishing this subject's notability according to WP:NMUSIC. It seems plausible, but at this point, the article has a bit too much of an air of "fan writing" than an encyclopedia article.  &mdash; jmcgnh  (talk) (contribs)  03:27, 2 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the feedback. I have been reading thoroughly and I am also trying to compare to other comparable pages to understand, generally speaking what quantity and quality seem sufficient to warrant the Stub template without incurring the Notability tag. Included in my sources are the following: Portland Herald Press, Van Magazine, Baltimore Sun, Baltimore Magazine, Fanfare Magazine, Second Inversion, Boston Symphony Orchestra archives, and I Care if You Listen. Though some are niche, they are highly respected in the contemporary classical music world. To take one case, Van Magazine did a major interview with Natalie last year, which I cited. It was conducted by Zoë Madonna who also writes for the Boston Globe. Many of the school sources you rightly identify are, if you go through, often a second source speaking to the same point. So, would you advise simply striking those sources? I guess I ask because I see many other peer composers with far less significant sourcing seeming to have a strong claim to their page, at least as far as the Notability tag is concerned. I have gone ahead and added 3 sources that were not present when you visited earlier that are of a higher quality. I look forward to additional thoughts/feedback. Thanks! Mariefrance (talk) 04:45, 2 January 2018 (UTC)


 * I find that there's a great deal of inconsistency on WP about what constitutes notability in the minds of editors and it often only gets hashed out more definitively in AFD deletion discussions. We don't want to go there yet. Many of your references qualify as noteworthy coverage of the subject while not quite addressing the notability questions that occur in NMUSIC. In other words, we wouldn't exclude those references from the article, but they may not contribute to establishing that the subject is notable in the peculiar and particular WP sense. In particular, interviews are usually discounted as not contributing to notability because they are not independent of the subject. I'd like to see some other editors weigh in before we go through the refs one by one. When I see trigger words like "prestigious" on a page, I usually get a bit skeptical. If we get a few experienced editors saying "obviously notable, that'll be sufficient to remove the tag. It looks like was satisfied when they did NPP on the page. So you're most of the way there.  &mdash; jmcgnh  (talk)  (contribs)  09:40, 2 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Great point on prestigious. Removed. Mariefrance (talk) 18:16, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
 * , - Me personally I am satisfied that it does meet notability requirements. As such it has a good variety of sources. Now what I would recommend however is that the should be written in a more formal tone and split into separate sections such as the section mentioning praise I would put that under a critics section. Here are some articles so you can get an idea Mindi Abair, John Adams (composer), another thing that would be beneficial for the article is to add some information about her. As most time people aren't only looking to see what awards or discography they have but they want to learn about their early life. But otherwise the article is fine now in terms of notability. --Clarkcj12 (talk) 18:22, 2 January 2018 (UTC)