Talk:Dale Smith (writer)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good article nomineeDale Smith (writer) was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 26, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed

Untitled[edit]

Paul Dale Smith or Dale Smith? It is, as far as I know, Wikipedia convention to give someone's full name and then to indicate what names/nickname/pseudonym they are generally known by. Bondegezou 10:58, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Henry. AIUI, Wikipedia set up the "living people" category to make sure users are sensitive about including information that might upset the subject of the article. I'm not comfortable about having my given name associated with my work, petty as it might seem - as noted previously, I don't write as Paul Dale Smith and it's in relation to my writing that I deserve an article. I'd be happier if it stayed as Dale.

Sheriff Bernard 13:50, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll leave it as it is. However, AIUI, the "living people" category was specifically around inaccurate and potentially libellous issues rather than a more general sensitivity. In other cases, the wishes of the subject of an article have been explicitly ignored. For a Dr Who example, the Doctor Who Restoration Team said they didn't want to be a Wiki article, but there they are. Bondegezou 17:46, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Biography assessment rating comment[edit]

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. --KenWalker | Talk 09:07, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment[edit]

Many of the sources provided do not verify the text in the article. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 01:45, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Example 1: and this encouraged him to submit two short stories to Marvel UK's Doctor Who Magazine. These were published in the Brief Encounters section, some of the last stories published before the feature was discontinued[3].

[3] source: http://website.lineone.net/~terry.pin/DWM.htm
Text on that page: The first professional, paid work I ever got writing was selling two stories to Doctor Who Magazine, then edited by Gary Russell. It started me off, and made me realise that rather than just being fun, it might be possible to make some money from writing.

≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 01:47, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Failed "good article" nomination[edit]

This article failed good article nomination. This is how the article, as of September 26, 2007, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: To be frank, the article in basic structure is written like a resume, that is, a brief account of the person's education, qualifications, and previous experience. It contains no substantial context on the subject's artistic contributions (what kind of impact, if any, does his work have? How does it fit into the larger scheme of the Doctor Who fan base and literature?), and no biographical section. This is unacceptable, and the article requires an in-depth review per the guidelines of the Manual of Style and especially WikiProject Biography. Example: A quotation of less than four lines in length should not be in blockquote format per the Manual of Style (not to mention basic MLA).
2. Factually accurate?: Per the above comment on sourcing and verifiability, the article does not meet the GA standard. Citing the website of the author is not an independent verification of facts, and is only appropriate for content referring specifically to the personage in question (not their published works or any potentially controversial assertions). Links and/or quotations should be provided in the refs so that proper verification can be obtained, especially when referencing direct quotations of content such as critical reception.
3. Broad in coverage?: The article lacks any personal biographical material of any kind, and only focuses on the subject's career and publications.
4. Neutral point of view?: As the article was written substantially by its subject, it clearly violates a neutral point of view as an autobiography. Though, per WP:AUTO, an autobiography is not forbidden outright, it is very strongly discouraged. Without considerable vetting through the larger community of editors (such as the knowledgeable folks at WikiProject Bio) it is a clear-cut violation of both the spirit and the letter of Wikipedia policy. Without independent verification, no factual claim now present should fail to be suspect.
5. Article stability? Not the subject of any recent or on-going edit wars, but considering the COI editing that has gone on, I would hesitate to call the article stable.
6. Images?: Present and accounted for.

As this article meets one or more the quick-fail criteria, and additionally has issues which would take longer than the maximum hold period of a week to fix, I have failed it rather than applying the customary hold period for minor improvements.

When these issues are addressed, the article can be renominated. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to a Good article reassessment. Thank you for your work so far. — VanTucky Talk 20:01, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would like to address these problems above, but obviously it's difficult without getting judged COI again. Clearly I can't be the person to write any section on the impact of my work in Who (although my assessment would be "very little"!), and a biographical section is difficult because of the scarcity of citable sources. However, I have found an interview that I did that contains some details about me rather than my work, so I'm suggesting adding this section to the article: any comments on its suitability and neautrality would be greatly appreciated:

"==Biography==

Smith was born in Leicester in 1976, and has been writing since the age of 8. In his youth, he worked as a youth worker at his school, receiving training on various aspects of the job including child abuse awareness. Early in his career, he wrote stage plays but has recently turned to writing prose as "it's still almost impossible to get anything actually produced".

He has stated that his ambition is to "be Ian Rankin, lock stock and house in Edinburgh. But I'll settle for just being able to keep writing and keep getting stuff seen by people". In his spare time he draws and creates digital pictures, and also plays the guitar{{Citation |last=Campion-Clarke |first=Ewen | contribution =Interview with Dale Smith| title=Judgement Day and Matrix Revelations| date=2006 |year=2006| pages=100-104| publisher=2006 Legacy Online Publishing|url=http://www.doctorwhothelegacy.co.uk/season5/JDMR.pdf}}."

Not amazing, but it's a start.

I'm also considering whether its worth putting 'Smith was quoted as saying that his chances of getting a commission to write a New Series Adventure were "about the same as my suddenly sprouting wings and flying to Mars", before the announcement that his NSA The Many Hands would be published in May 2008' from the same source into the section on my work: is it a little self-congratulatory?

Any help and comments gratefully received. Sheriff Bernard 09:54, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed change[edit]

I'm proposing to move the article to Dale Smith (writer) - wiki naming convention seems to be that people having articles based on the name they are known by rather than their real names (see Hulk Hogan and George Elliot) and as a writer, I'm known as Dale, not Paul. Sheriff Bernard 08:49, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've checked through the relevant guidelines, and in the end it's a bit ambiguous. I'm taking that as meaning it comes down to a judgment call of editors, and since I see no real harm in making this move, I'm going to go with your recommendation here. If anyone does have a problem (or a better reading of the guidelines), let me know. --Infophile (Talk) (Contribs) 16:57, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, looks like we can't do it simply, as the target article has an extra bot edit on it. I've gotta go right now, but I'll put up a move request when I get back. --Infophile (Talk) (Contribs) 16:59, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

British or English?[edit]

Do we know for sure that Dale regards himself as 'British'? In these contemporary times we have alot more of us English feeling English as opposed to that 'British'. 86.147.66.59 23:54, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't actually regard myself as either, but I think the previous discussions on this page have demonstrated that its what the concensus of Wikipedians think that's important - if the English equivalent categories exist, feel free to make the changes and see if anyone objects. Sheriff Bernard 06:42, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Although looking at the article, I notice British isn't mentioned, so if you want to change it the other way, feel free there too :) Sheriff Bernard 06:43, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Dale Smith (writer). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:16, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Dale Smith (writer). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:09, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dale_Smith_(writer)&oldid=1205335555"