The following discussion 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.
I see no plausible assertion of notability. The only claim to notability is that the subject is head of the
Patrick Foundation, but that article itself offers scant evidence of notability: only 3 secondary references, all by the same journalist in the same newspaper within 2 months of each other (Geoff Ward, in the Western Daily Press). Similarly, the article on Marriage himself uses the same 3 Geoff Ward secondary sources plus a passing mention in an
article by Duff Hart-Davis in The Independent. Both articles appear to fail both
WP:GNG and
WP:BIO.
"has attended as a partner the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs "Partnership Against Wildlife Crime" since inception" (what does "as a partner mean"?)
"His notable research amongst a range of submissions" (who says its notable? Any source for that value judgement, or evidence of its notability, such as citation details)
In several places the sentence structure is convoluted. Even the lead sentence "Edmund Marriage (born 28 February 1941) is the director of the Patrick Foundation and British Wildlife Management, an independent researcher, lobbyist and lecturer" is poor grammar, and it is also self-contradictory. (Is he head of a Foundation, or is he independent?)
Even if those serious problems can be resolved, the
hook citeria do not appear to be met. They specifically say Try to avoid hooks that take the form of "... that X is Y? -- yet this hook is just that. --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs) 20:55, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
The more I look at this, the less I like it. For example:
Fantastic job reviewing the article BrownHairedGirl. Thanks. It needed looking at by someone who knows the rules better than me. I'll sort out the peacocking and try to change the text significantly from the justenergyradio site and try to improve the article according to your recommendations over the next few days. I am not sure why the house of commons report would fail to meet notability requirements, it gives him a pretty good write up along with the Patrick Foundation, from which the article was primarily based. If you read my userpage you'll perhaps understand that conflict of interest, I have met Edmund, and conducted the original survey of a 1 mile, straight, rock-cut trench leading to the source of the
Jordan river in the
Aaiha plain in 2009, which Edmund's uncle
Christian O'Brien suggested was the
Garden of Eden archaeological site in 1984 and has largely been ignored by the corporate world of academia since then. Considering my interest simply involves saving the
Garden of Eden and getting the records of human culture straight, purely in the interest of the benefit of mankind. Whilst appreciating the guidance, I excuse myself from writing COI articles on the grounds that I have no personal or financial motivation and have exterminated greed from my personality in this endeavour to get as much of these records of the origins of our culture documented before their imminent destruction by
Lebanesebulldozers. Paul Bedson ❉
talk❉ 00:40, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
Oh my. Brownhaired Girl is correct. This person does not strike me as notable either, and AfD is the next step.
66.168.247.159 (
talk) 01:11, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
The following discussion 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.
I see no plausible assertion of notability. The only claim to notability is that the subject is head of the
Patrick Foundation, but that article itself offers scant evidence of notability: only 3 secondary references, all by the same journalist in the same newspaper within 2 months of each other (Geoff Ward, in the Western Daily Press). Similarly, the article on Marriage himself uses the same 3 Geoff Ward secondary sources plus a passing mention in an
article by Duff Hart-Davis in The Independent. Both articles appear to fail both
WP:GNG and
WP:BIO.
"has attended as a partner the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs "Partnership Against Wildlife Crime" since inception" (what does "as a partner mean"?)
"His notable research amongst a range of submissions" (who says its notable? Any source for that value judgement, or evidence of its notability, such as citation details)
In several places the sentence structure is convoluted. Even the lead sentence "Edmund Marriage (born 28 February 1941) is the director of the Patrick Foundation and British Wildlife Management, an independent researcher, lobbyist and lecturer" is poor grammar, and it is also self-contradictory. (Is he head of a Foundation, or is he independent?)
Even if those serious problems can be resolved, the
hook citeria do not appear to be met. They specifically say Try to avoid hooks that take the form of "... that X is Y? -- yet this hook is just that. --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs) 20:55, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
The more I look at this, the less I like it. For example:
Fantastic job reviewing the article BrownHairedGirl. Thanks. It needed looking at by someone who knows the rules better than me. I'll sort out the peacocking and try to change the text significantly from the justenergyradio site and try to improve the article according to your recommendations over the next few days. I am not sure why the house of commons report would fail to meet notability requirements, it gives him a pretty good write up along with the Patrick Foundation, from which the article was primarily based. If you read my userpage you'll perhaps understand that conflict of interest, I have met Edmund, and conducted the original survey of a 1 mile, straight, rock-cut trench leading to the source of the
Jordan river in the
Aaiha plain in 2009, which Edmund's uncle
Christian O'Brien suggested was the
Garden of Eden archaeological site in 1984 and has largely been ignored by the corporate world of academia since then. Considering my interest simply involves saving the
Garden of Eden and getting the records of human culture straight, purely in the interest of the benefit of mankind. Whilst appreciating the guidance, I excuse myself from writing COI articles on the grounds that I have no personal or financial motivation and have exterminated greed from my personality in this endeavour to get as much of these records of the origins of our culture documented before their imminent destruction by
Lebanesebulldozers. Paul Bedson ❉
talk❉ 00:40, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
Oh my. Brownhaired Girl is correct. This person does not strike me as notable either, and AfD is the next step.
66.168.247.159 (
talk) 01:11, 30 August 2012 (UTC)