Talk:Sasha Compère

Notability

the following is copied from the section on WP:REFUND where restoration of this draft was requested. See the history there if needed. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:00, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

... Please restore the page as I intend to work on it. Grn1749 (talk) 18:31, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Done – as a draft that was deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. However, the draft namespace, though it is intended to provide some breathing room to create and develop a page without the time pressure of immediate review, is not for the indefinite hosting of material that is unsuitable for inclusion in the article mainspace. Please continue to work on the draft so that it meets Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for inclusion and then submit it for review—at the least, prior to another six months elapsing. When you are ready, a review can be requested by placing this code at the top of the page and then saving: {{subst:submit}}. Grn1749 This draft does not, yet, demonstrate that Compere is notable (as Wikipedia uses that term). Please add additional cited sources to those originally inserted by Amylandis before moving this to the main article space or submitting it to a review by the articlesd for creation project. This draft has not (yet) been made part of the AfC project. I have done some copy editing and added bibliographic data to the sources, and removed the citation to the IMDB, which Wikipedia does not consider to be a reliable source. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:07, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

DESiegel Can you help me understand why you say the current sources don't prove Sasha Compere is notable? I read the Wikipedia Notability guidelines and it says there need to be multiple external, reliable sources that reference the person. Two of the current sources only cite Compere in passing, but one of the articles cited is exclusively about her hire on the show Miracle Workers (the Wikipedia page of which shows Compere to be the only series regular without a Wikipedia page), and the fourth source contains an interview with her. Thanks in advance for helping me understand what's needed. Grn1749 (talk) 11:16, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Grn1749 I did not do the equivalent of a full AfC review, just a quick note. But based on that and a second look after your message, I don't think this is quite ready for the article mainspace yet. The Variety piece is surely more than a passing mention, but it is a bit light perhaps to constitute Significant coverage]. But ]even granting it full value, the Collider piece is, as you said, an interview, and interviews are generally considered not to count as independent sources, which are normally needed to establish notability. In that case there is some comment from the reporter before the interview starts, but it is limited, and I would at best count that as the equal of 1/2 of a full source. The others are, as you mention, passing mentions which do not count for notability. The usual rule of thumb three reasonable quality independent reliable sources with significant coverage, although two may suffice if they are of particularly high quality. Add two additional sources comparable to the Variety' piece and I think this would be over the line of acceptance. Of course, a different editor doing a review might have a different opinion, this is to some extent a judgement call. Anyway, that is why I wrote what I did. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 14:16, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

DESiegelThat makes a lot of sense. Thanks for breaking it down for me, as I'm relatively new here (and you've already helped me once before!). Since this draft was created, Compere has been a series regular in the HBO show Love Life, so I expect I can find more sources for her. But, for the sake of argument, let's say I can't find more articles beyond passing references in reviews of the shows she's been in. When we look at the two TV shows she's been a series regular in, Miracle Workers and Love Life, in both those shows, she is the only series regular who does not have a Wikipedia page. Doesn't that suggest her career makes her notable even if her media coverage doesn't reflect that? Given that Compere is a Black woman, racial and gender bias may mean she has less coverage than a white male actor with comparable TV credits. Therefore, couldn't her career on its own justify a Wikipedia page, in the hopes that Wikipedia not reflect the biases found elsewhere on the web and in the media? Or, let me know if there's a different space where this kind of discussion is better addressed. Grn1749 (talk) 14:41, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Note, I'm asking this not just to pose random what-ifs, but because my primary interest in editing Wikipedia is to address under-coverage of women and people of color, so I'm trying to learn what the community's thinking is on these issues. Grn1749 (talk) 14:43, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Grn1749 In my view, the best approach is to look for those additional sources. If they can be found and addede, the issue is setteld. If not you could submit for approval and debate the issue if a reviewer declines, or move directly to mainspace and perhaps debate the issue at a deletion discussion.

There is systematic bias in the world, and since Wikipedia bases its coverage on what reliable sources have written, that bias must be reflected to some extent in Wikipedia's coverage of topics. Wikipedia does not exist to right great wrongs. Wikipedia's inclusions standards should not, IMO, be modified to include people who have been subject to bias when they do not meet the usual standards. The question is not worthiness, but reliable coverage. We include an article about Hitler, who was surely not worthy, but was very significant and had lots of coverage. We do not include Jane Doe (fictional) who was saintly and helped many, but was quite unknown outside the small town where she lived. The above is my own opinion -- I cannot speak for the community as a whole. But i believe it reflects the views of many and has current consensus.

In future, discussions such as this would be better on the draft's talk page, Draft talk:Sasha Compere . In fact I will copy this exchange there, so that it remains with the draft. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:00, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

This is the end of text copied from WP:REFUND. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:00, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Grn1749 WP:NACTOR does include, as criterion 1, Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions. and it may be that Compere could be considerered notable under that guideline. (NACTOR is what is known as a "specialized notability guideline", or SNG. The relations between the various SNGs and the General notability guideline (GNG) are somewhat disputed, particularly the case where a subject passes one of the SNGs but does not pass the GNG.) I think it would be better to clearly demonstrate fulfillment of the GNG and also of NACTOR, if possible. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:22, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

DESiegel Thank you very much for these explanations and links to guidelines! Much appreciated. I'll work to find the additional sources needed to establish her notability. Grn1749 (talk) 17:11, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Citations needed

Amylandis Thank you for contributing to this page! However, the edits you made on September 3, 2020 don't include any citations. Could you please add citations? Otherwise I will remove those additions. Grn1749 (talk) 16:20, 4 September 2020 (UTC)