User:Cassiopeia/NPPSchool/Zatsugaku

Hello, welcome to your New Page Patrol School page! Every person I instruct will have their own page on which I will give them support and tasks for them to complete. Please make sure you have this page added to your watchlist. Your NPP School page has been specifically designed according to you and what you have requested instruction in - for that reason, please be as specific as possible when under my instruction, so that I know the best ways to help you (and do not be afraid to let me know if you think something isn't working).

Make sure you read through Notability as that's the knowledge which most of the questions I ask you and tasks you do will revolve around.

This page will be built up over your time in the Academy, with new sections being added as you complete old ones. Each section will end with a task, written in bold type - this might just ask a question, or it might require you to go and do something. You can answer a question by typing the answer below the task; if you have to do something, you will need to provide diffs to demonstrate that you have completed the task. Some sections will have more than one task, sometimes additional tasks may be added to a section as you complete them. Please always sign your responses to tasks as you would on a talk page.
 * How to use this page

If both the instructor and student make completing the course curriculum a top priority, it will generally take around a month to go through the entirety of the curriculum. This pace is not required or necessarily expected, but rather is provided in order to give participants an idea of what to expect.

Notability
 PART 1 

When patrolling or reviewing an article, you may often come across articles do not meet the WP:N guidelines, but the editors make the edits in good faith. Please read WP:AGF and do not WP:BITE the new editors.


 * A. Notability is a test guidelines to decide whether a given topic warrants its own article in Wikipedia mainspace. Please read What Wikipedia is not, General Notability Guidelines, Specific Notability Guidelines, Stand-alone list before completing the following tasks.
 * Begun Zatsugaku (talk) 11:05, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

General notability guidelines
1. In your own words, why it is important to WP:AGF and not WP:BITE new editors.

Answer: Wikipedia was conceived, built, and grown on the premise of honest individuals valuing the creation of a freely available knowledge resource and devoting sufficient time and energy to learning how to make useful contributions—both in new content and administrative functions. Individuals become new contributors for a wide variety of reasons, whether merely as part of a class assignment or on the mistaken assumption that they can promote their company. However, all those who take the first step have the potential to become a substantive contributor, even if their initial efforts are trivial or misguided, and even if they don’t come back to Wikipedia for several years. Having specific policies re AGF/BIT is essential because even simply non-communicative interactions can reasonably be interpreted as hostile and dismissive, and the threshold for deterring a newcomer's further contribution is not very high. More broadly, benevolence toward others is a matter of the proper application of the principle of justice.


 * ✅. New editors are unlikely to be familiar with Wikipedia's guidelines. If one were to criticise them harshly ('bite'), which might be scared them away  from Wikipedia. Instead, one should assume good faith, and approach new editors in a friendly and welcoming manner and  help them correct their mistakes in a constructive and friendly manner so they may continue to contribute to Wikipedia. Cassiopeia(talk) 11:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

2. In your own words, how does notability is defined in Wikipedia?

Answer: Notability is a standard (genus) for the inclusion of a topic on Wikipedia as its own article or as an entry on a list (differentia); the standard is applied both through general guidelines and through contextual, domain-specific criteria. The primary guideline is founded on three tests: 1) significant coverage by 2) reliable, 3) independent sources (each of which embodies its own standards, i.e., verifiable, secondary sources). Domain-specific criteria (“Subject specific notability guidelines”) are developed and used when there are a large number of prospective entities or topics for inclusion whose details vary along a continuum of notability e.g., films, organizations, politicians, professors, geographical features. (Assessment of notability may thus require subject area expertise or further research if sources are not provided.) Wikipedia further defines notability by exclusion (by selectivity criteria or differentiation by Wikimedia projects), and by example (ostensive).
 * ✅. In Wikipedia, notability means "worthy to be noted" - it is defined as a topic is "presumably" notable for stand-alone article or list if (1) it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject whee by the sources talk "directly" about the subject in depth and in length and not only passing mentioned and (2) it is not excluded under the What WP:Wikipedia is not policy. Cassiopeia(talk) 11:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Pls see I have fix the link -from WP:Wikipedia is not policy to WP:Wikipedia is not policy. Cassiopeia(talk) 00:41, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

3. Does a step by step instructions on how to "Change a car tire" considered a notable topic in Wikipedia?

Answer: No. WP:NOT i.e., not an instruction manual. (However, it is plausible that such content might be subsumed as an exemplar on a page about instructional techniques.)
 * ✅. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a how to manual - see WP:NOTHOWTO. Cassiopeia(talk) 11:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

4. What are the differences between A WP:GNG and a specific notability guidelines? how do we determine which one to use when patrolling an article?

Answer: The GNG functions as a starting point for a potentially unlimited range of entities and concepts: from farm implements, to medical diagnosis, to mythical beings, to obscure physical phenomena. As per the definition, GNGs focus on the existence of significant reliable, verifiable, independent secondary sources, but also the appropriateness for the Wikipedia platform. On the other hand, SNGs address specific umbrella concepts, e.g., sports, through further subdivision into well-established fields, such as baseball, golf, sumo, etc., in which consensus is then used to develop a set of criteria or stipulations for notability. However, in some cases, criteria falls back on similar basic premises as in GNGs, e.g., that coverage of an athlete exceeds the routine, expected level for a typical participant. While domains covered by SNGs will almost certainly increase as Wikipedia is enhanced, currently there are only twelve and the number is likely to remain fairly limited. Thus, it is reasonable for a page reviewer to be aware of all the SNG domains and refer to them when encountering pages where there is any uncertainty as to their notability. (At some point, the page creation process could provide for guided or automated categorization and thus prompt editors/reviewers with the appropriate SNG.)
 * ✅ Both can be used when patrolling but those subject falls under SNG/SSG (sport specific guidelines) but fails to meet the guidelines usually do not survive in article for deletion, unless passes a strong GNG guidelines. (We will discuss WP:AfD in later assignments). WP:NPOL, WP:NCORP and WP:NPROF do have very specific requirements for NPOL and NORG might have SIGCOV might be deleted in AfD due to the SGN criteria and NAADEMIC would survive AfD as scholar dont usually dont have many independent sources talk about them.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 11:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Specific notability guidelines
5. If an editor creates an article about "2024 Summer Olympics" in 2019 without providing any sources, is the subject considered not notable and why?

Answer: It is still notable. "Notability is based on the existence of suitable sources, not on the state of sourcing in an article." This example is both ostensibly notable (as a continuum of an established, notable series) and explicitly notable as part of the WP:NSPORT SNG. (Even Olympic sub-events are presumed notable.) This example also passes WP:N(E)#Future events.
 * ✅. However, if the event has no support of independent, reliable source (IRS), then it would consider not notable.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 11:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)


 * B.  Without considered of sources/content policies and review just based on "subject specific notability" (SSN) "alone" for sake of the exercises below,  please answer if the subject meets the SSN guidelines, based on the given content below, and specify under (1) which notability criteria they meet or fail (example - MUSICBI#1 if certain sub set of criteria is applicable) and (2) reasons/explanations.

6. A New York city based 2019 start up software company, specializing in data mining, has just received a USD 200K investor fund.

Answer: The brief background of this question implies that there is no specific coverage or further criteria to establish notability, so no, based on "No inherent notability" / WP:ORGSIG.
 * ✅ It also fails all the criteria of WP:NCORP. Specified sources is the very important requirement when reviewing a "company/organisation" article for many sources are either not independent (marketing/paid by the company itself) or not reliable (press releases) and etc.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 11:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

7. Nascimento Ferreira who is a Ultimate Fighting Championships (UFC) fighters with the undefeated mixed martial arts record of 8-1.

Answer: According to NMMA#1 he ("Ze Colmia") is deemed notable as he has fought at least three fights within the UFC. (Interestingly, he doesn’t seem to have a page.)
 * . Ferreira has fought one time under UFC promotion - see here. (note Dana White Contender Series is not UFC event). WP:NMMA specifies a mixed martial arts fighter needs to have at least 3 fights under tier one promotion (see WP:MMATIER) to meet the NMMA requirements. Each SNG sportman/team specifies its requirements, some required a sport person has competed in certain event such as WP:NCYCLING or certain league such as WP:NBASKETBALL, other require a player played for a "high performance country" such as WP:NRU and etc. I would usually only review review sport person article / or any article of the specified sport/subject which I am familiar with.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 11:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Clearly I should have dug deeper into coverage to determine which events qualify. (This is not a field I have familiarity with so I will probably steer clear of reviewing most athlete pages.)


 * This is an exercise, for such I would provide some example of SNG/Sport Specific guidelines for participants so they may know there are a lot of such guidelines. I dont review any articles that with more than half the page full of equations/proofs/formulas for I have to go back to university to take some advance mathematics subject prior I would understand the content of the page.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 00:41, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

8. A upcoming action drama title "Suleiman the Great" based on the the life of Suleiman the Magnificent, was reported will be in production in December 2020 and to be released on August 2022 in the cinemas.

Answer: Generally not; according to WP:NFF Ph3, even though the film is presumably in production it "should generally not have [its] own article unless the production is notable…" (Incidentally, I think the guidance in WP:NFF is logically reversed. The 3rd Ph is the broader statement. The first paragraph, by negation, implies the opposite guidance.)


 * , The subject is not notable under if the film is under production where IRS support such claim as WP:NFF states that films that are not confirmed to be in principal photography should not have their own articles.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 11:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)


 * One reason I relied on the last criteria rather than the first was that while the question merely "reports…production in December" it is now after that date and filming could reasonably be anticipated to have begun (hmm…maybe not during a pandemic). My understanding is that notability exists outside of the issue of supplied IRS, so while not confirmed in the question, it might easily be confirmed by further research. Of course, I understand this is an exercise question, but that circumstance shifted my focus to the more clear-cut latter criteria, which supersedes the first criteria. (To clarify my earlier comment: The logical flow and wording in [[WP:NFF] is unnecessarily convoluted. The lead stipulation is essentially: not notable if not confirmed shooting; thus editors might assume it to imply notability if principal photography is confirmed. However, the last paragraph supersedes that implication by saying that even if shooting has begun, it is still not generally notable unless the production itself is notable.  So, the latter criteria should come first and can be simplified into something like this: "Films that have not been publicly released should generally not have their own articles unless shooting has been confirmed to have started AND the production itself is notable per the notability guidelines." Of course, wordsmithing here is a digression from the exercise.)


 * Since this is an exercise, and at times, questions/info might not be current or specific enough, you could provide multiple answer in different scenarios if you wish.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 00:41, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

9. A political candidates, without any previous or current political position, who is running for November 2020 election for a Senator position in United States with multiple local newspapers coverage of his candidacy.

Answer: Within WP:NPOL, the candidate would likely be notable based on GNG as directed by the SNG. (The prolog to the questions says not to consider the sources.)
 * Generally some IRS could be found when a candidate is running for a political position. To pass WP:NPOL, once needs to be officially elected to state/national position.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 11:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)


 * I understand that the standard requirement is being elected. I am not very familiar yet with the coverage threshold for notability for a person under GNG, even though I understand the principle. The election campaign process creates a continuum of coverage, and I see that once senate candidates receive major party endorsement, they seem to become notable even if they had no previous notability criteria. (There are two such cases recently in Virginia.) But I realize that was not part of the question. My question is what is the best choice for a reviewer when it seems clear a candidate will likely become notable under GNG, for example, he or she is clearly going to win a party nomination and receive significant IRS coverage? From reading on this topic my impression is that it would be preferable to move the page to a draft space than to delete it.


 * If the subject "is running" for a political position and source could be found in local media, and with no previous positical held position, then the subject is considered fails the SNG notability guidelines. We would accept the article if the subject has "won" the election but yet to assume the office. However, if the subject is notable under other matter which passes the GNG guidelines, the the subject is warrant an article in Wikipedia. The key here is that, same as WP:NCORP, the SNG criteria is particular strict to previous advertising/campaigning/promotional subject to be included in Wikipedia. Do note SNG and SSN dont superseded GNG; however, when it comes to AfD, they hold considered amount of weight and almost always is the decision of the outcome of AfD.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 00:41, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

10. A singer who self produced his first album in May 2019 and his songs are listed in Spotify.

Answer: Within WP:ENT there is no basis for the singer in this example to be deemed notable.
 * ✅ Fails all WP:ENT criteria.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 11:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)


 * C. Based on  which SSN guidelines the below subjects are notable under (1) which notability criteriaMUSICBI#1 (if certain sub set of criteria is applicable) and (2) reasons/explanations

11. Carlos Alós-Ferrer

Answer: Alós-Ferrer is notable on WP:NPROF #5, His academic position as the NOMIS Professor for Decision and Neuroeconomics Theory is a named, endowed position and WP:NPROF #8, he is editor in chief of a journal in his field. If those criteria were not present, it might be worth assessing whether his work met #1 (Impact in Discipline) or #7 (Impact outside academics).
 * Being a professor does not meet WP:NPROF criteria 5. However the subject meets WP:NPROF #1 - see for being highly cited  and #8  as the chief editor of Journal of Economic Psychology .<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 11:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)


 * I should have included #1; I wasn’t sure from the page the scope of his research’s influence but it is implicit in his other roles and position. I am still uncomfortable the discretionary judgement of what is significant if I’m not familiar with the research field, even though I do/review research (maybe because I do research). Re #5, The description on the page could be a little clearer, but he does hold a named chair appointment not just a regular professorship per reference 4.


 * Well-done on WP:NPROF #5. I have added the new source into the article. <b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 00:41, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

12. Alistair Overeem

Answer: He is notable under NKICK #1,. Fought for a world title of a major organization (in this case several). NKICK #1 at least three professional fights; #2, Fought for the highest title of a top-tier MMA organization; Probably #3, Sherdog rating – but I would have to research what his ranking meant.
 * ✅. Well-done. Meets both WP:NMMA and WP:NKICK for criteria 1 & 2. He is also one of only two fighters to hold world titles in both MMA and K-1 kickboxing at the same time.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 11:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

13. Jennifer Lopez

Answer: She is notable under WP:SINGER #1, Multiple, non-trivial published works, etc.; #2, Singles or albums on national charts (Approx 25+); #3, Has a record certified gold; And all the subsequent categories, except for perhaps #6 which is ensemble membership. She is also notable under:
 * WP:COMPOSER #1, Credit for writing and #5, Listed as a major influence.
 * WP:ENT #1, #2, #3 (all)
 * WP:CREATIVE #3, Major role in …co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work (e.g., film).
 * ✅ Good.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 11:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

14. Three Mile Island accident

Answer: The event is notable under WP:EVENTCRIT:
 * WP:LASTING, Enduring historical significance/lasting effect
 * WP:GEOSCOPE, Widespread impact
 * WP:COVERAGE: WP:DEPTH Analysis that puts event in context; WP:PERSISTENCE Coverage beyond news cycle; WP:DIVERSE Wide-ranging reporting
 * ✅.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 11:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

15. Persepolis

Answer: The location is notable under WP:GEOFEAT, Artificial feature officially assigned the status of cultural heritage or national heritage. It could also be notable under WP:GEOLAND, “Even abandon places can be notable because notability encompassed their entire history.” The city is legally recognized in the current context as historical/tourism cite but also previously as a capital of Achaemenid Empire. Thus, even if the ruin was no longer physically present, it might still be notable.
 * ✅.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 11:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

- Good day. See assignment 1 above. For all the assignments, pls provide hist diffs of the articles, reverts, edits, reports, results of the reports, guidelines, talk page messages, and any hist diff that is applicable. Pls provide guidelines where applicable and justify/explain in details of your application or analysis. Pls ping me if you need assistance (here in this program page at the communication section of every assignment). Please book mark this page and ping me when you have finished the assignment for me to review. Stay safe and best.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 22:53, 8 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Let me know if I'm providing enough detail. Zatsugaku (talk) 20:50, 13 April 2021 (UTC)


 * See comments above. Pls house the "WP" page with double brackets before and after WP's page name. Example instead of WP:N, pls provide WP:N (see in source editing mode). Let me know if you have any questions. Stay safe and best.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 11:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks so much for all the feedback! I’ll await the next assignment. It is great to be digging into all of these areas in a systematic way. I’ll be sure to add the wikilinks in the future; I apologize for the inconvenience. (I saw later I should have put my reply below yours but I didn’t want it to ping you a second time by moving it.) I presume there will be times when I make an error and there will be some additional review.


 * Since I’m hoping at some point to be able to teach others this content, I hope it is okay if I spend some time reviewing my mistakes/oversights. Sometimes I overthink what should be straightforward questions and then I go back and contemplate how I came to the wrong conclusion. I see it as an "optimizing" process but I realize it can also be an impediment to just getting work done. So, my apologies in advance if I seem to belabor topics. I have put some additional thoughts and observations on the questions above. Let me know if I am doing too much.  Zatsugaku (talk) 17:28, 16 April 2021 (UTC)


 * I have commented and corrected the link in Q2. This is a compressive program and you are doing well and heading to the right direction as you are being thorough. For most of the reviewers, they dont go through this program as we "expect" them to read the material and many do know only a small and specific info needed and for some they just want to have the reviewer right for hat collecting and commented they have read the necessary info when they apply the right. The way you to it is a very good start. Once you have gone through this program, you can apply for the reviewer right and you will gain more experience by just reviewing new articles. Also you can start joining the discussion at AfD once you have finish the assignments (assignment 4-5). I started as a trainer in WP:CVUA after I had completed the CUVA program and has more than 30K counter vandalism edits. I started set up this program after, after I have the approval from other admin, where I have more than 120K edits where I reviewed more than 1K new articles. I take my time to review an article for such I only would review about 5-10 per day when I was "really free" on that day. Some reviewers are "mass reviewers"  they review hundred of articles per day just by scanning the info. There is no limit of how many articles a reviewer should review or not at all, each of use work on they own pace where time permit; however, a review right would be taken away, if the reviewer consistently review article wrongly and dont know the guidelines or how to apply the guidelines. We also in need to reviewers as we have new page backlog of  at least over  2 months at any given time (Note: This is NPP and dont confuse with AfC (article for creation  / draft), that is reviewing the draft page - another right for review the draft page and using same guidelines but not the same procedures - we can look into the differences if you want once you have finished this program).  You dont need to have more than 100k total edits to become a trainer for I am just a little bit conservative to make sure make sure I have the knowledge and the practice to so so. If an editors is confident they have enough knowledge (know the the guidelines and have enough participation in AfD, CSD, PROP, reviewing new page and etc - we will cover all the above and more in later assignments), then they can be a trainer for some trainers only have about 30k total edits when they joined the team. I will explain more in later assignments for it would be too much info at one go for your first assignment. Stay safe and best.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 00:41, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

-

Background for trainees

 * Wikipedia is an encyclopedia for such content claimed should be supported by independent (secondary), reliable sources for verification. Please read WP:RS, WP:IS, WP:RSP, WP:V, WP:PROVEIT, WP:Primary, WP:Secondary, and WP:Tertiary and answered the the below questions in your own words.


 * You could contact WP:RX if you could not find the sources yourself either on web due to Paywall content or printed books.

Exercises

 * 1.


 * 2.


 * 3.

-

Answer: The nature of Wikipedia as a platform with content created by volunteers who are not required or vetted to possess any specialized skills, requires that in most cases the content needs to be verifiable. Additionally, information in Wikipedia can be utilized in more diverse ways if the content comes from reliable, independent, and accessible sources as readers can not only check the accuracy but can pursue further information. In some cases (perhaps frequently), content can be verified but there are reasons to dispute other facets of the source (reliability, independence, or whether it is secondary or primary, etc.) and thus might be contested/rejected by other editors. Of course, verifiability principally applies to being able to assess if the content accurately represents a secondary source, not necessarily confirming that that source was accurate.
 * 4. Please explain in your own words why the content claimed needs to be verified?

Answer: Wikipedia is generally a tertiary source and thus in most cases it is against policy to be used as a source. Content on pages needs to be properly backed by citations on that page. However, other Wikipedia pages can provide guidance to an editor as to what aspects of a topic are important to include and hyperlinking provides a means to offer further content while keeping the current topic/page concise.
 * 5.Could we used Wikipedia as the source? and why?

Answer: A source (an individual) might have first-hand access to information but also might be a participant in an event or have a personal or financial stake in an event. For example, a doctor describes the experience of treating patients during a pandemic. A secondary source (reporter) would serve to confirm that the source was in fact a doctor who was in that circumstance and have notes or recordings from that the individual describing such events.
 * 6.Give an example and explain why a source is reliable but not independent of a subject?

Answer: From a policy standpoint, a source can be independent merely by not having any conflict of interest, personal connection, motivation toward a bias, etc; independence primarily relates to the nature of relationship between the source and content. Reliability relates to individual or institutional reputation, professional skills, and/or processes to ensure accuracy. For example, a volunteer high school reporter with no experience might attend a speech given by a famous alumnus economist, yet egregiously misconstrue or misquote the speaker in an article in the school newspaper.
 * 7.Give an example and explain why a source is independent source but not reliable?

--
 * Pls indicate "y" for yes or "n" for no or "?" after "ind", "rel" and "sig" (see first example) and give a brief explanation of why you place "y" or "n".

David Howell Petraeus (born November 7, 1952) is a retired United States Army general and public official. He served as Director of the Central Intelligence Agency from September 6, 2011, until his resignation on November 9, 2012 after his affair with Paula Broadwell was reported.
 * 8.

Petraeus was born in Cornwall-on-Hudson, New York, the son of Sixtus Petraeus (1915–2008), a sea captain from Franeker, Netherlands.

In 2003, Petraeus commanded the 101st Airborne Division in the fall of Baghdad


 * 9. Please answer if the subject meets the "subject specific notability" guidelines, Which subject specific  notability based on the given content above, and specify under (1) which notability criteria they meet or fail (example - MUSICBI#1 if certain sub set of criteria is applicable) and (2) reasons/explanations.

Answer: By Subject Specific Guidelines (people), David Petraeus became notable under Notability_(people) “Any Biography” standard #2, within the historical record of his field (US military) after his role in Iraq and notably skilled leadership in Mosul 2003-2004. He would subsequently be notable, also in the military history context, for leading the United States Central Command (all leaders of Central Command have pages). Petraeus also became notable under Notability_(people) for significant coverage in multiple secondary sources in articles about his life and military career (per citations in this exercise and others). Finally, he would be notable under Notability_(people) after appointment as Director of the CIA, which amounts to a "national…office."

-

Martina Hingis is a Swiss former professional tennis player. She won five Grand Slam singles titles. Hingis was one of the highest-paid female athletes in 2000. She retired in November 2007 after being hampered by a hip injury for several months and testing positive for a metabolite of cocaine during that year's Wimbledon Championships, which led to a two-year suspension from the sport.
 * 10.


 * 11. Please answer if the subject meets the "subject specific notability" guidelines, Which subject specific  notability based on the given content above, and specify under (1) which notability criteria they meet or fail (example - MUSICBI#1 if certain sub set of criteria is applicable) and (2) reasons/explanations.

Answer: Under subject specific guidelines for tennis players Notability_(sports), Hingis seems to qualify in all the categories (even ATP in a mixed doubles). For example, in WTA Tour records she holds numerous rankings. Based on the above content—the exercise text, (five Grand Slam titles)—that would be criteria 3. She would also qualify under GNG for coverage per the above citations.


 * Pls indicate "y" for yes or "n" or "?" for no after "ind", "rel" and "sig" (see first example) and give a brief explanation of why you place "y" or "n".


 * 12.

Frank Lloyd Wright (June 8, 1867 – April 9, 1959) was an American architect, interior designer, writer, and educator. Wright believed in designing structures that were in harmony with humanity and its environment, a philosophy he called organic architecture. His creative period spanned more than 70 years. He works includes The Guggenheim, swirling, snail-shaped museum in the middle of Manhattan. Fallingwater, which has been called "the best all-time work of American architecture." This is one of Wright's most famous private residences (completed 1937), was built for Mr. and Mrs. Edgar J. Kaufmann, Sr., at Mill Run, Pennsylvania. Constructed over a 30-foot waterfall, it was designed according to Wright's desire to place the occupants close to the natural surroundings. The house was intended to be more of a family getaway, rather than a live-in home.


 * 13. Please answer if the subject meets the "subject specific notability" guidelines, Which subject specific  notability based on the given content above, and specify under (1) which notability criteria they meet or fail (example - MUSICBI#1 if certain sub set of criteria is applicable) and (2) reasons/explanations.

Answer: Under Subject Specific Guidelines, Notability_(people), Frank Lloyd Wright is notable under all four criteria. He is widely cited by his peers (The AIA award was a survey), he originated the Prairie style, which was called "the first uniquely American architectural style…" He created a significant body of work (more than 425 buildings) and numerous books and documentaries have been published. His works have become monuments (Guggenheim, Fallingwater, Taliesin, etc.) and won wide critical acclaim.


 * 14.

Jordan Lennon (born February 22, 2000), is a British film producer and actor. Lennon is currently a member of BAFTA. He continues to work aside 20th Century Fox, Warner Bros, Wicked Wales, Capture Studios, Cineworld, Paramount Pictures, and Rockefeller Foundation.

At age 16, the Vice President of 20th Century Fox, Paul Higginson. Who previously worked on Star Wars, Titanic, and Independence Day took on Jordan and Rowan Snow as a mentor. In December 2018, Jordan and Rowan finished British Film Academy. Jordan lived in Skelmersdale for 10 years before moving to Rhyl, North Wales. He's currently writing 'Stranger in the Night' scrreenplay for Warner Brothers.

Re the fifth source (Tape Community Music and Film):
 * y The source is a non-profit/charity that seems to have no link to particular actors/individuals.
 * y The source is reputable within the limited range of information they offer.
 * n The source doesn’t discusses the subject. The Tape Community organization does offer a training course of that name but the WP content (a claim he completed the course) can’t be verified directly on the site but could perhaps be done through a direct contact with the organization. The WP link in the exercise for the course doesn’t got to the Tape Community website which arranges the courses but rather to a BFI London film festival page.


 * 15. Please answer if the subject meets the "subject specific notability" guidelines, Which subject specific  notability based on the given content above, and specify under (1) which notability criteria they meet or fail (example - MUSICBI#1 if certain sub set of criteria is applicable) and (2) reasons/explanations.

Answer: The actor has had one significant role in six episodes of a TV drama based in Ireland. By the subject specific guidelines #1 for entertainers Notability_(people), he does not have sufficient work to be notable. His self-list other productions don’t appear to be themselves notable. Re guideline #2, there is no readily apparent fan base. Re Guideline #3, there is no indication or claim of contribution to field. The subject fails every criterion.


 * 16.



Sonny William Williams (born 3 August 1985), who is a Muslim, is a New Zealand All blacks rugby union footballer, Williams was a Marist Saints junior when he was spotted playing in Auckland by Bulldogs talent scout John Ackland. In 2002 he was offered a contract and moved to Sydney (as the youngest player to ever sign with an NRL club) to play in the Bulldogs' junior grades.


 * 17. Please answer if the subject meets the "subject specific notability" guidelines, Which subject specific  notability based on the given content above, and specify under (1) which notability criteria they meet or fail (example - MUSICBI#1 if certain sub set of criteria is applicable) and (2) reasons/explanations.

Answer: Williams meets the notability requirements for both Rugby League and Rugby Union. Under Rugby League he meets criteria 1 and 3. For Rugby Union, he meets criteria 1, 2, and 3. For example, NRL 2004 premierships, the Rugby World Cup in 2011 and 2015 and other Rugby Union European teams, and the 2016 Olympics. He looks like he would also be notable as a boxer under criteria 1 as a WBA International Champion, which would also imply he meets criteria #3 which is broader.


 * 18.



"Can't Stop This Thing We Started" is a song by Canadian singer and songwriter Bryan Adams. The song was written by Adams and Robert John "Mutt" Lange, and was the second single from Adams' 1991 album Waking Up the Neighbours where by the song was nominated for Grammy Award 1992 "Song of the Year"

Weekly charts

End-of-year charts


 * 19. Please answer if the subject meets the "subject specific notability" guidelines, Which subject specific  notability based on the given content above, and specify under (1) which notability criteria they meet or fail (example - MUSICBI#1 if certain sub set of criteria is applicable) and (2) reasons/explanations.

Answer:

The performer meets most of the subject specific guidelines for musicians, including #1, 2,3, 4, 5, 8, 11, and 12 (i.e., theme song for Robinhood ).


 * 20.

Kamlesh Bhatt is a Solution Architect and a DevOps Engineer living in Singapore. I am a fan of technology, music, and entrepreneurship. He is interested in photography and travel. He could be reached at his blog and youtube channel.


 * 21. Please answer if the subject meets the "subject specific notability" guidelines, Which subject specific  notability based on the given content above, and specify under (1) which notability criteria they meet or fail (example - MUSICBI#1 if certain sub set of criteria is applicable) and (2) reasons/explanations.

Answer: Kamlesh Bhatt does not appear to meet any Subject Specific Guidelines for people. It is interesting to note that there are no SSNG for many professions including people in the software development world, although he would still be unlikely to meet such criteria.

-


 * Hi, see Assignment 2 above. Stay safe and best.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 00:49, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, pls note that I have change the page name to User:Cassiopeia/NPPSchool/Zatsugaku. Pls book mark this page in your computer so you may find it. Thank you.02:53, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
 * For question 8 onward, pls open (click the show icon) to see the table.<b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:105%;color:#FA0"> Cassiopeia</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 10:38, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry if I was suppose to notify you on completion. Zatsugaku (talk) 08:40, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I'll be back in my regular time zone in a little less than a week. That would be a good point to get started on next assignment. If you are too busy to review/comment, perhaps I can still get started then on 3. Zatsugaku (talk) 22:17, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Are you still interested in continuing the program? Pls let me know.00:34, 18 May 2022 (UTC)