Talk:Billy Corben: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Comment: reword |
+find sources |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Find sources notice}} |
|||
'''[[Wikipedia:Article Incubator|Article incubation]] assessment''' |
'''[[Wikipedia:Article Incubator|Article incubation]] assessment''' |
||
{{#if:|<hr width=50%>{{{overcom}}}|}} |
{{#if:|<hr width=50%>{{{overcom}}}|}} |
||
Revision as of 08:07, 14 February 2013
Article incubation assessment
- Does the article establish notability of the subject ?
- A. It meets the general notability guideline: yes
- B. It meets any relevant subject specific guideline: yes
- Is it verifiable?
- A. It contains references to sources: yes
- B. There are inline citations of reliable sources where necessary: no
- C. There is no original research: no
- Is it neutral?
- A. It is a fair representation without bias: no
- B. It is written in a non-promotional manner: no
- It does not contain unverifiable speculation: yes
- Pass, Fail or Hold for 7 days:
Comment
I don't work with article incubation, so I'm unclear on whether -- and how -- to move this back to article space. IMO, though, we have enough WP:RS to meet our basic notability threshold. Other issues, such as WP:OR and WP:ADVERT, can be better dealt with in article space, I believe, where it is more likely to get attention from the larger editing community. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:38, 12 October 2011 (UTC)