User talk:Marissa Marinello

Your submission at Articles for creation
 Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia&.
 * To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the [ reviewer's talk page]
 * Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! LegoKontribsTalkM 21:15, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
 Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia&.
 * To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the [ reviewer's talk page] . Please remember to link to the submission!
 * You can also get | live chat help from experienced editors.
 * Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! SarahStierch (talk) 21:17, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Ryan Smith Article
Hi Marissa,

Thanks for getting in touch with me. You actually shouldn't be trying to create an article for your boss because it violates Wikipedia's policy concerning conflict of interest. Wikipedia is not a webhosting cite nor a place for self promotion or promotion of private interests, so the administrators take a pretty dim view of people being asked by their bosses to create articles for them. You may want to pass along the information at the COI policy page to your bosses for future reference. However, since you have already had one article accepted and have done a lot of work on the second one, I will try to help.

With respect to the article, the sources are not exactly the same and the notability of the two subjects is not the same. Sources need to be mostly independent, reliable sources. That means that the subjects own website, his company's website, any interviews he has given, social networking sites, press releases by him or his company... are all primary sources and not considered independent nor reliable. Only independent, reliable third party sources are considered capable of establishing the notability of your subject. The others may confirm some information about your subject but will not be considered for the purpose of notability and if your sources aren't sufficient to establish notability, your article will continue to be declined.

So let's look at your sources... The New York Bar association merely confirms he is a lawyer. The HLN Evening Express is not independent of the subject of the article so although it should be one of your sources to confirm the information that he is the host of that show, it doesn't help establish notability because the source is connected to your subject and is essentially just promoting their show. Animal Planet suffers from the same issues. The law firm's own website is obviously not independent of your subject, and again although it should be cited as confirming some information about him it does not help to establish his notability. Unless one is a member of Lawloop, the Lawloop link just takes you to a page to sign up so it isn't really a source at all. It was also created by Zuber so even if it took you to Smith's page it wouldn't help because all of the information there comes from either Smith and his firm so it's not independent. The article by Alfred Lee has nothing to do with Smith but rather is about the creation of Lawloop by Zuber and his partner so really shouldn't even be cited in an article about Smith. I would remove both the Lawloop link and this one. The Yahoo Finance link doesn't work so I can't say much about what is there. The Sean Doherty cite takes the reader to a couple of lines of an article about Lawloop - nothing about Smith. If there is anything about him in the rest of the article the reader can't get to it without being a subscriber to LexisNexis which, unless the reader happens to be a lawyer, they probably are not. Your last citation to the Bernstein article is again not at all about Smith or his notability, but rather about Lawloop.

So, in the end, you have only three relevant sources - establishing no more than he is a lawyer and one of the hosts of a television program discussing myriad current events. That isn't going to convince any reviewer that he meets the criteria for notability such that there should be an encyclopedia article about him. Zuber, on the other hand did create Lawloop and has done a bunch of other things that are notable - that is the difference. When I google Mr. Smith, every site I go to seems to have almost word for word the same information which suggests he is good at self promotion but doesn't indicate that other, independent sources find him to be notable enough to write about (ie. CNN cite, the cite about Dafina and him (Ballerwives), etc.) The Diversity and the Bar article found at http://sunnyhostin.com/website/cmsAdmin/uploads/diversity_bar_2012.pdf woudl be considered an independent, secondary source and could be helpful to you to revise your submission. Also, some of his lectures and/or appearances as panel moderators on issues such as Race, Gender and the Law might help to demonstrate that others believe him to be notable enough to invite him to speak on these issues (ie. http://www.cvent.com/events/mcca-s-13th-annual-creating-pathways-to-diversity-conference/agenda-89711e0b8bca4594b048697923860cb9.aspx) Some of the stories he has covered and people he has interviewed may also be notable, particularly if they were discussed or quoted by other sources. If he has won any awards that would help to establish notability.

You know your subject best so I can't be of much more help but try to look for truly independent sources who find your subject notable enough that they have written about him and/or his work. If significant coverage by independent sources just isn't available it may be that he is not yet notable enough to have his own encyclopedia article.

I hope some of this is helpful. If I can be of any further assistance, feel free to get in touch at my talk page. Good luck and best regards, Snowysusan (talk) 10:11, 23 October 2012 (UTC)