A tag has been placed on User:Booklad123/sandbox, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Sheldybett ( talk) 21:24, 9 December 2018 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on Kyoung H. Park, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Praxidicae ( talk) 23:50, 9 December 2018 (UTC) reply

I deleted your article because it did not provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. It is now Wikipedia policy that biographical articles about living people must have independent verifiable references, as defined in the link, or they will be deleted. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the subject or an affiliated organisation or company, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, blogs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the he claims or interviewing him. None of your sources were independent third-party sources and cannot help to show why he is notable, if he is.

• Your article seemed to be discussing his plays, with no attempt to show how he meets the notability criteria I've linked above

Before attempting to write an article again, please make sure that the topic meets the notability criteria linked above, and check that you can find independent third party sources. Also read Your first article. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:02, 10 December 2018 (UTC) reply

Hi! Here are notes on Draft:Kyoung H. Park:

• Be very, very careful of what words you use and how you write. One of the issues that was raised was one of neutrality, as the article came across as promotional. Words like "strives" and "passion" are seen as inherently biased because they're so often used to promote individuals, so they should be avoided. Wikipedia has a page about words to watch that can be helpful with this. Also make sure that you attribute any praise that Park has received. Writing it in "Wikipedia's voice" (ie, stating an opinion like you would a fact) should be avoided.

• When listing plays, I'd probably just list them out in list format as opposed to a template. It can make the section seem clunky and is typically not necessary unless the individual has put out a very large amount of work.

• You can use primary sources to back up basic details, however this will really need independent and reliable sources to establish notability. Keep in mind that self-published sources like blogs are typically not seen as reliable because they rarely undergo the type of editorial oversight and verification that Wikipedia wants and are also usually not cited as an authority by reliable sources like scholarly and academic sources. Basic notifications of events (ie, a listing for a performance) are seen as routine and mentions in passing are often seen as trivial, unless they mention something very notable, like a major award. Reviews like this are definitely good, however be aware that interviews are typically seen as primary sources on Wikipedia. I don't always agree with that, but I wouldn't heavily rely on interviews to establish notability.

Something like this is also good. The book lists his play, but also accompanies it with a decently lengthy bio of Park.

I hope that this helps! Shalor (Wiki Ed) ( talk) 16:18, 10 December 2018 (UTC) reply

Hello, Booklad123, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Shalor and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) ( talk) 18:46, 10 December 2018 (UTC) reply

Hi All, There have been concerns that this article was promotional and pulled too much from primary sources. I have reworded the article so that it reads in "Wikipedia's voice". I have also found secondary sources to replace what I got from his personal website. However, I still have an issue. Many of the secondary sources seem to pull information directly from Park's personal page. Furthermore, I found that significant information regarding Park come mostly from interviews. I know that it is a contested issue that information is pulled from interviews, but I think that the interviews are integral in understanding Kyoung H. Park.

Hi! I've moved the article back to the draftspace for the time being. The issues that led to the article's deletion were those of notability and tone, so I want to make sure that these are dealt with before it gets moved live, as I want to prevent this from getting deleted before that point. The draft still has issues when it comes to tone, so I'll make some tweaks to that end. I'll make some notes about what I change, of course. Now when it comes to secondary sources, if the source is just restating content from Park's website, that would be seen as primary. Shalor (Wiki Ed) ( talk) 18:40, 11 December 2018 (UTC) reply

Here are the notes:

Lead

• Any hugely major claims need to be attributed with a non-primary source. I'd avoid including any claims like Park being the first to do something unless you have an independent, reliable source that states this - the South Brooklyn Network link is primary since it's reprinting a press release, so it shouldn't be used to back up claims like that. I'm removing this claim for the time being. The reason that you should avoid using claims like this is because it's extremely common for someone to claim to be the first to do something - however whether or not they are the first to do that thing is sometimes debatable. It's entirely possible that other Koreans from Latin America have produced and published plays in the US - they may just have not gained media attention, is all. That's why it's so important to have that independent, secondary coverage and even then, it needs to be carefully phrased.
• Avoid words like "desire to" and similar. These are seen as inherently promotional.

Education & Early Career

• Make sure that you avoid using euphemisms or slang.

Career & Productions

• Be careful when it comes to pulling from primary sources. They can be used to back up basic details, but always keep in mind two things. The first is that they cannot establish notability, but an equally important thing to remember is that they will always be non-neutral because their goal is typically to promote the person, place, or topic at hand. Even if the goal isn't to promote, the person(s) who created the primary source were under no obligation to write neutrally and as such, they often use language and terms to describe themselves or other things that would be seen as non-neutral as far as Wikipedia and encyclopedia writing goes.
• You don't have to underline names on Wikipedia - this should generally only be done if this is the way that the name is stylized outside of Wikipedia.
• Rather than summarizing the plot, it would be better to give information on where Park's works were performed and when.
• I removed a sentence that seemed to be redundant to the one preceding it.

List of works

• This needs to have the dates (year will do) of when the works were published or produced for the first time.

As a whole, be very careful of sourcing. You have a lot of primary sources. Make sure that when you look at content, that you're making sure that it's not a reprint of a press release, which will be seen as primary. Also, not all sources will be seen as reliable in general - make sure that you verify that the site has a good editorial oversight and verification system in place and that it's routinely seen as a reliable source by other reliable sources. I'm not sure that TheaterScene is a reliable source, offhand. Shalor (Wiki Ed) ( talk) 19:08, 11 December 2018 (UTC) reply

• Hi Booklad123! I'll respond here and on your page. Thank you for fixing the dates. I did change the writing up slightly with the first claim to saying that he's credited as being the first, since that gives a bit more wiggle room. With interviews, you can definitely use them but they won't be seen as non-primary by many Wikipedians so it's really not a good idea to rely heavily on interviews to establish notability. I've added some sourcing and I think that there may be enough to squeak by, it may be a good idea to ask Jimfbleak to take a look, as he was the admin who handled the deletion. (Note, he wasn't the person who tagged the page.) Shalor (Wiki Ed) ( talk) 16:05, 12 December 2018 (UTC) reply

• Posting this here as well. Shalor (Wiki Ed) ( talk) 16:05, 12 December 2018 (UTC) reply

Kyoung H. Park, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Zanhe ( talk) 17:08, 18 January 2019 (UTC) reply