User talk:Justinorbit
December 2018[edit]
Please do not add people without their own Wikipedia articles (ie, not notable) to alumni lists, as you did with Penistone Grammar School. The woman you added back may be part of a band that has a Wikipedia article, but that does not make her notable in her own right. If you think she should be in this school's article, write an article on her that is accepted by Wikipedia, or provide multiple reliable citations from reputable sources such as national newspapers (not band or record company sites) to show she is notable and attended the school. Wikipedia is quite clear on this proviso, after all, if we accept those who are not notable (in the eyes of Wikipedia) we will end up with schools' articles having lists of most nonentities that were educated there. I assume you added her back in good faith, but re-adding would amount to disruptive editing. Also, I see that you have a clear conflict of interest over the school, which means you should be very careful what you add and the way you add to the article. Please see WP:COI. Thank you. Acabashi (talk) 17:38, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Acabashi: Just because someone doesn't have a Wikipedia article themselves doesn't imply they are not notable. I understand your point about not adding everyone that studied there, but similarly to Alan Mercer on the same page who doesn't himself have a Wikipedia page, I feel she is noteworthy. If references were to be found showing Eva Spence's education at the school, I think she should be added back to the notable alumni list. Regards, Justinorbit (talk) 17:56, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
- Alan Mercer is a professor, which for Wikipedia has a automatic assumption of notability, unless it is American associate professors which are little more than UK senior lecturers. Mercer is adequately reffed, with proof of attending Penistone, from St Andrew's University. The only one that doesn't have an attendance ref is Noel Moore, but there is one in his article from the Guardian that mentions the school, and could be brought across. The one possibly suspect is Paul Copley, whose article mentions Penistone, with a cite at the end of a para that contains other stuff... so it is not possible to prove attendance from that cite which is dead, and from a seemingly self-published web site. However, he is notable so a little grace could be given.... some editors would be more brutal with him.
- You could probably find lots of refs for lots of Penistone attending pupils, but it won't make them notable enough. A reference for Spence just only attending just won't cut it. She has to be notable in her own right (not as an adjunct to, or a frontwoman of, a notable band) for Wikipedia, in which case an article might as well be written on her... any takers? As I said in an edit summary, personal notability does not rub off on somebody because they are associated with something that is seen by Wikipedia as being notable. Has Spence been specifically mentioned in reliable mainstream media?; I've quickly found a couple so you might find more. After this she, as you intimated, needs a source to show attendance.
ArbCom 2019 election voter message[edit]
 | Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message[edit]
| Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message[edit]
| Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |