User talk:Zoegonzalez07

Welcome!
Hello, Zoegonzalez07, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Adam 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. Adam (Wiki Ed) (talk) 02:41, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Moved article
Hi! I'm helping out with your class this semester.

I noticed that your page had some issues with it that could cause another editor to delete it. These issues are that the page lacked independent reliable sources to establish notability and that it had prose in it that could be considered promotional. To save the page I've moved it to User:Zoegonzalez07/Kevin Papatie, as I was concerned that another Wikipedian might nominate it for deletion before you could fix the issues, which I'll go into below.

In the case of notability, you must establish notability for Papatie by showing where he and/or his work has received coverage in independent and reliable sources. You've sourced the article almost solely with WP:PRIMARY sources, those sources that were released by Papatie or people/organizations/etc that are affiliated with him. You can use these to back up basic primary details but they cannot show notability regardless of what they claim. What you need are things like newspaper sources that have written about him or reviews of his work, academic works that discuss him, or similar. Be cautious of awards, as not all awards will give notability on Wikipedia. Awards given out at smaller and/or more obscure film festivals likely will not be seen as major enough to give notability on Wikipedia. A good way to tell if it's major or not would be to look at whether or not the festival has gained a lot of coverage aside from routine notifications that it will occur and who reports on the award ceremonies.

Another thing to note is that you need to be cautious when drawing from primary sources. The reason for this is that a primary source is more likely to refer to its topic (in this case Papatie) very favorably and may over-state claims in order to make them look as good as possible. It's rare that a primary source will contain out and out fabrications, but it's fairly common to see someone puffing up the claims a little. (Over-stating claims and being favorable isn't a bad thing on their websites as their goal is to get people to see Papatie's stuff, but it does mean that you should be more cautious when writing an encyclopedia article.)

When it comes to the promotional-ish prose, what made me concerned were terms like "innovative" and "striking". I know that this wasn't your intention, but these are terms that are usually used to promote someone and can also be seen as subjective. Try to avoid using these unless you're directly quoting a reliable source that makes these remarks. When a source does have this, make sure that you quote the person in a way like "Film expert John Smith has referred to The Wakiponi Mobile as an "innovative media training and production mobile studio that is sure to spark creativity"." This way it will be clear that this is the opinion of the source.

This is something I'm more mentioning as an aside - when referring to his films in the article, you shouldn't bold them - the titles should be italicized only. This is a quick and easy fix, so I'll do this for you.

All of that said, none of this is particularly troublesome and I moved it mostly just to be sure that it would still be here when you log back on. Once you've fixed these, feel free to move it back to the mainspace and add it to some categories. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 11:03, 5 April 2017 (UTC)