User talk:Yannis Sot

Welcome!
Hello, Yannis Sot, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Generation Alpha, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type help me on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  DGG ( talk ) 08:42, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Your first article
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Proposed deletion of Generation Alpha


The article Generation Alpha has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * neologism. Inadequate sources.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on |the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.  DGG ( talk ) 08:42, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi there,

First of all I apologize in advance as I am new in wikipedia editing and I am not even sure if I should post my reply here. I received a proposed deletion message of a recent article which I created (named "Generation Alpha").

You mentioned two reasons for the proposed deletion.

1. Neologism The term "Generation Alpha" refers to something new which did not existed before. So by definition we would need to use some kind of neologism since we are trying to describe something new. But at the same time this necessary neologism is in line, extending and following a long "tradition" of how generations are categorised and named, making it a neologism only partially and by necessity as per above. So based on the above this should not be an argument for deletion.

2. Inadequate sources You are right and I added some additional sources which I found. Hope this is more complete now and I would be happy to hear your view as well.

Thank you very much Yannis — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yannis Sot (talk • contribs) 10:58, 16 December 2015‎


 * Any content needs reliable secondary sources (typically press coverage) if it is to stay in the encyclopedia. --McGeddon (talk) 08:14, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Writing about Yannis Sotirakos and McCrindle
Hello, Yannis Sot. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Generation Alpha, you may have a conflict of interest. People with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, see the conflict of interest guideline and frequently asked questions for organizations. In particular, please:


 * avoid editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, its competitors, or projects and products you or they are involved with;
 * instead, propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the template);
 * avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
 * exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing, and autobiographies. Thank you.--McGeddon (talk) 08:14, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello and happy new year!

I appreciate your comments and agree. The conflict of interest point applies to everybody, since everybody can be related (or not related) somehow to a topic, hidden (or not hidden) behind anonymity and/or pseudonyms. So this applies as well as to you, me and anybody else.

I suggest that we please concentrate on the topic itself in order to stop mutually deleting each other's versions.

My key points are the following:

1. Chronological appearance: "Generation Alpha" term is a new term describing a new global generation. Nobody knows if at the end, the term will gain wider acceptance. However at this stage it should be introduced in the Wikipedia article in line with the chronological events related with it's introduction. So I do not understand your point in presenting McCrindle as the one who introduced the term in 2015, when there is evidence that the term had been introduced approximately 10 years before by somebody else (something you practically also accept in the 2nd paragraph of your version of the article).

2. A2K: You again deleted my link and created a link to an organization which has NOTHING to do with the term "Generation Alpha". The Non Governmental Organization A2K (meaning Alpha 2000) with a link www.A2Konline.org is the one who introduced the term "Generation Alpha" and NOT the "Access 2 Knowledge" which is simply a synonymity.

3. Collaboration towards a common phrasing: It is somehow obvious from your versions that you have a tendency to promote McCrindle and present him as the introducer of the term in the first paragraph, although this proves to not be true in the next paragraph which is accepted by you as well. Let's please find a common ground and phrasing in order to reflect first of all the facts and then also the personal views of each other.

I will be glad to hear from you. There is really no point to continue the delete/rewrite pattern. Let's work together and find a solution. All the best and happy new year again. Yannis Sot (talk) 13:25, 1 January 2016 (UTC)


 * 1) The article isn't claiming that that McCrindle introduced the term, just that he used it.
 * 2) My mistake. I've fixed the link.
 * 3) My "tendency to promote McCrindle" is just favouring reliable secondary sources above primary sources. If somebody gave a lecture and no secondary sources reported on it, that's usually a sign that Wikipedia shouldn't cover it either. It certainly shouldn't give it any greater weight than opinions which were covered by secondary sources. --McGeddon (talk) 17:44, 1 January 2016 (UTC)