Talk:Drew Van Horn

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: withdrawn by nominator, closed by Flibirigit (talk) 02:59, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Created by Mgreason (talk). Self-nominated at 16:46, 11 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Drew Van Horn; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

  • I am concerned that the Georgia Nonpublic Postsecondary Education Commission might not be notable for its own article, but rather than nominating for deletion, I hope the nominator can improve the article. Flibirigit (talk) 15:45, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have found and incorporated four additional sources into the article. Do you consider that sufficient? There are numerous other sources naming GNPEC but they really contribute nothing to the topic. Mgrē@sŏn (Talk)
  • It looks improved. A full review is still needed for both articles. Flibirigit (talk) 21:41, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I share the previous reviewer's concerns with the GNPEC article, and have similar concerns with the other one, too. Notability issues aside, they are written by cobbling together primary sources in a way that makes the text not independent of the subject, thereby failing WP:NPOV. Primary sources are acceptable to fill in non-controversial detail; they cannot be the framework on which the article is built. The GNPEC article, in particular, draws heavily from two government reports; the reports are likely public domain (I haven't checked) but we cannot construct an article by summarizing a government report. I'm going to nominate the second article for deletion, and the first requires substantially better sourcing. Vanamonde (Talk) 22:39, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • I have undone the rejection of this nomination, since the major concerns were only with one article. The biography is still eligible and deserves a full review once changes are made. Flibirigit (talk) 01:50, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Closing the nomination as withdrawn as per above. Flibirigit (talk) 02:59, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]