User talk:Marissajd1212

Welcome!
Hello, Marissajd1212, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Shalor and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:40, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Great, thank you Shalor for the guidance, this has been helpful. Marissajd1212 (talk) 16:50, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Cookie


Tabhernandez has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Tabhernandez (talk) 21:16, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Gillian Jerome for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gillian Jerome is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Gillian Jerome until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bearcat (talk) 22:37, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Page notes
Hi Marissa,

I wanted to give you some feedback on the article. I've asked that if all else fails, it can be transferred back to your userspace if they decide the article should be deleted from the mainspace, so hopefully you will still be able to have a copy of your work and continue to improve the page. In the meantime, however, you can absolutely continue to edit and improve the page. brings up some good points in their deletion argument about tone, notability, and sourcing, so make sure that you pay close attention to what they've written, as this can serve as a guide to improving the article. I'll elaborate on this and give specific examples in my notes, of course.

One of the issues brought up was one of tone, as the article takes a fairly glowing, positive perspective on Jerome. You need to make sure that the content is neutrally written. Avoid things like "gave a voice", as this is almost always used in promotional and press material to inspire people to support something or someone. A section that is particularly rife with promotional tones is the section on Hope in Shadows. With something like this, you want to take a "just the facts" approach, especially as the section is a little vague on what this actually is. It looks like it's ultimately a photo contest and the name of a book that compiles stories and photographs from the contest's participants. Summarizing this a bit more would likely help with the promotional tones and clarity:
 * Tone


 * In 2003 Pivot Legal Society started Hope in the Shadows, a photo contest Vancouver's Downtown Eastside. Pivot Legal Society asked participants to photograph things that were important to them, with the intent that this would give the participants a voice and recognition for their efforts. The initial contest led to the creation of a yearly calendar project where that year's winners are asked to share their story along with their image. The calendars are then sold by vendors from low-income backgrounds, who get to keep half of their sales. In 2008 a book by the same name that was edited by Jerome and her husband was released through Arsenal Pulp Press and the Pivot Legal Society that compiled 35 different stories attached to winning images from the photo contest. Hope in the Shadows won the Vancouver Book Award, was shortlisted for the Roderick Haig-Brown Regional Prize, and was longlisted for the George Ryga Book Award for Social Issues.

This condenses the information in a way that would make it seem less promotional. It also streamlines the information so that readers can see the main gist of what Hope in the Shadows is - a contest, book, and calendar. The contest is really the main thing here - everything else is a spinoff of this main thing.

Something else to be careful of are claims of importance of any type. For example, the section on her contributions to Canadian literature is unsourced and as such, can come across as a way of trying to inflate her importance. I'd remove that section unless you have good independent sourcing.

Another concern that was brought up was one of sourcing. There are a lot of primary sources in the article. Primary sources are things that are released by Jerome, her organization, or by people or groups that she's affiliated with. They cannot show notability, not even if they claim fairly major things. Notifications of events can't show notability either, as they're seen as fairly routine and participating in events isn't something that would automatically give notability. To be honest, most articles don't mention specific events at all unless they're extremely major and received enough coverage in independent, reliable sources to show that it's worth highlighting. Most of the time it's mentioned offhand, in a "has participated in events such as the Robson reading series". What you need in an article are things like newspaper articles written about Jerome, reviews of her or her work in academic or scholarly journals or books, and the like. An example of a decent source is this newspaper review of one of her books, although of course academic sourcing like this book would be best.
 * Sourcing

Also, any content about a living person that isn't sourced can be challenged and removed.

Notability is something that can honestly be a little difficult to establish for people, especially when the main focus is on the organizations they participate in rather than themselves. If someone is only known for their organization then it's not uncommon for there to be an article on the organization as opposed to the person. What you need here is sourcing that covers her and her other works.
 * Notability

I hope that this helps - I can definitely assist with the article and you can absolutely use the paragraph revision I created above, of course. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 14:34, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Shalor
Thank you so much for your help clarifying why Jerome's article has been nominated for deletion, this is extremely helpful for me. I appreciate your example that shows how I need to focus primarily on the facts and will take what you have given me in order to improve my article. I will try and find more sources that are reputable in order to back up the information, although I have done quite extensive research so am a little worried about finding enough resources to make the 2000 word count that is needed for our class assignment. Although I understand that right now the most important thing is to fix the article for Gillian Jerome in order to try and keep it up online of Wikipedia. Thank you for being willing to help me with this article.

Marissajd1212 (talk) 16:48, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
 * No problem! I know that this can definitely be an overwhelming process, so I want to make sure that you know that I can help you with whatever you need. I've added a little sourcing to the article and found this book, which covers her poetry fairly extensively. There was also this nice review for a book featuring a few of her pieces. You may want to hit up your school's academic databases to see if there's anything there. Google doesn't always properly display all search results from newspapers, journals, and whatnot, which is why it can be so problematic with sourcing. (Long story short, it has to do with location, advertising, and some other factors, but those are two of the biggest.) I definitely think that she's notable enough for her own article and hopefully the sourcing I added can help with that, so one of the main things we need to focus on is the tone.
 * I did speak with your professor about word limit and while she does want additions that are about that length, she's also going to be looking at the amount of effort and work put into everything, which you've clearly done. I don't think that you have to worry about the word limit with the article - the main thing will be trying to save it now. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:30, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Wow, I am so pleased with your active helpfulness. This is super useful and I will absolutely take your advice and continue looking for academic sources. I haven't been able to find much through Emily Carr but will look again. Thanks for these sources, I will check them out now. Marissajd1212 (talk) 20:06, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

More comments
See Talk:Gillian Jerome for more comments. Pam D  09:07, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks ! And thanks to everyone else that helped with the article! This was great teamwork! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 13:52, 5 April 2018 (UTC)