Talk:David Wicht

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Draft talk:David Wicht)

David Wicht Draft Page[edit]

Good Day All

I have continued working on David Wicht's page today adding sources and editing the main page. He has been mentioned in books and academic journals and so I have added these. I still seem to be struggling with the fact that I have declared that at the end of this process I will be paid something. I do not work for David Wicht of for Film Afrika. To all intents and purposes I am a freelance writer writing his Wikipedia page. I work in the film industry as a performance and dialogue coach. I just wanted this noted on my talk page.

Thanks Karin van der Laag Karinvanderlaag (talk) 16:23, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source assesment[edit]

  • source 1 is good though not well.

Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 09:34, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments left by AfC reviewers[edit]

  • Comment: There is substantial reviewer comment here. Please may I ask the reviewer who accepts this or a subsequent version to tick the box to copy the comments to the article's talk page 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 12:58, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: The "Company affiliations" section is poorly sourced some of the sources do not mention him and should probably be deleted, it serves no purpose other than trumpery. Theroadislong (talk) 08:42, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Well done on creating the draft, and it may potentially meet the relevant requirements (including WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO, WP:CREATIVE) but presently it is not clear that it does. As other reviewers have noted, Wikipedia's basic requirement for entry is that the subject is notable. Essentially subjects are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. To properly create such a draft page, please see the articles ‘Your First Article’, ‘Referencing for Beginners’ and ‘Easier Referencing for Beginners’. Additionally, the draft tends to read too much like a CV, which Wikipedia is not. Also, if you have any connection to the subject, including being paid, you have a conflict of interest that you must declare on your Talk page (to see instructions on how to do this please click the link). Please familiarise yourself with these pages before amending the draft. If you feel you can meet these requirements (it would be helpful if you could please identify, with specificity, which criteria you believe the draft meets?) then resubmit the page and leave a note for me on my talk page and I would be happy to reassess. Cabrils (talk) 00:25, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: This page has been moved back from article space to draft space. Please read the comments by the draftifying reviewer and address them. Do not resubmit this draft without addressing the comments of the previous reviewer. If you do not understand why this article was sent back to draft space, please ask the reviewer rather than simply resubmitting.
    You may ask for advice on how to improve this draft at the Teahouse or on the talk pages of any of the reviewers. (The declining reviewers may advise you to ask for advice at the Teahouse.)
    If this draft is resubmitted without any improvement or with very little improvement, it will probably be rejected. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:05, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: This is undoubtedly copied from somewhere. Please also note, it should be Wicht and not David. Integrate the sources if they're reliable, not a list of links Star Mississippi 20:32, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]