User:Cassiopeia/NPPS/Grumpylawnchair

Hello, welcome to your New Page Patrol School page! Every person I instruct will have their own page on which I will give them support and tasks for them to complete. Please make sure you have this page added to your watchlist. Your NPP School page has been specifically designed according to you and what you have requested instruction in - for that reason, please be as specific as possible when under my instruction, so that I know the best ways to help you (and do not be afraid to let me know if you think something isn't working).

Make sure you read through Wikipedia:Notability as that's the knowledge which most of the questions I ask you and tasks you do will revolve around.

How to use this page

This page will be built up over your time in the Academy, with new sections being added as you complete old ones. Each section will end with a task, written in bold type - this might just ask a question, or it might require you to go and do something. You can answer a question by typing the answer below the task; if you have to do something, you will need to provide diffs to demonstrate that you have completed the task. Some sections will have more than one task, sometimes additional tasks may be added to a section as you complete them. Please always sign your responses to tasks as you would on a talk page.

If both the instructor and student make completing the course curriculum a top priority, it will generally take around a month to go through the entirety of the curriculum. This pace is not required or necessarily expected, but rather is provided in order to give participants an idea of what to expect.

Notability

PART 1

When patrolling or reviewing an article, you may often come across articles do not meet the WP:N guidelines, but the editors make the edits in good faith. Please read WP:AGF and do not WP:BITE the new editors.

A. Notability is a test guidelines to decide whether a given topic warrants its own article in Wikipedia mainspace. Please read Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, General Notability Guidelines, Specific Notability Guidelines, Stand-alone list before completing the following tasks.

General notability guidelines

1. In your own words, why it is important to WP:AGF and not WP:BITE new editors.

Answer: We must assume good faith because we want newcomers to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Newcomers' actions, while they may seem malicious to more experienced editors, may seem entirely appropriate in their limited experience with Wikipedia. Wikipedia needs new editors to continue to grow and spread its ideals of freedom of knowledge. Newcomers, if treated badly, may leave and never come back, depriving us of new volunteers and knowledge that we could have used to make the encyclopaedia better if only we were nicer.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:50, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

2. In your own words, how does notability is defined in Wikipedia?

Answer: Notability is shown when a topic is covered in several reliable sources (per Wikipedia:Reliable sources guideline) that are independent of the subject and describe the topic in detail (as in, not simply mentioning it in passing).

Y. In Wikipedia, notability means "worthy to be noted" - it is defined as a topic is "presumably" notable for stand-alone article or list if (1) it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject whee by the sources talk "directly" about the subject in depth and in length and not only passing mentioned and (2) it is not excluded under the What WP:Wikipedia is not policy. Cassiopeia talk 00:50, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

3. Does a step by step instructions on how to "Change a car tire" considered a notable topic in Wikipedia?

Answer: No, because Wikipedia is not a manual. WP:NOTHOW states that articles should not be in a "how-to" style, which a step by step tutorial on changing car tyres presumably would be.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:50, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

4. What are the differences between A WP:GNG and a specific notability guidelines? how do we determine which one to use when patrolling an article?

Answer: Specific notability guidelines govern the notability of certain topics in certain topic areas. They may provide additional stipulations for establishing notability on top of the standard notability guideline. For example, Wikipedia:Notability (books) specifically declares all the notability guidelines for books, which are much more specific than the boilerplate Wikipedia:Notability rule. We determine which one to use by checking Category:Wikipedia notability guidelines, which is a list of all the domain-specific notability guidelines and see if any apply. If one does, use the rules in that, and if none of them apply, than use the stipulations in WP:GNG.

Y. SNG (specific notability guidelines) and SSG (Sport specific guidelines) do NOT superseded GNG. When patrolling a new page first check whether the topic meets GNG, since this is the fundamental measuring stick topics should meet. If the topic does not meet GNG, then check if whether there is a SNG for the topic in question. Certain subjects would not meet GNG due to the fact that no article talk about them directly in length and in dept such the academics- WP:PROF - who would received few or none independence source talk about them (we would see BBC write an article about car stuck in a tree see here but not the President of Australian National University would be hard to find) Other SGN such as WP:NPOL specify a very strict set of source criteria and requirements respective. Both SNG/SSG and GNG can be used when patrolling but those subject falls under SNG/SSG (sport specific guidelines) but fails to meet the WP:GNG guidelines would sometimes nominated for deletion for discussion WP:AfD to determine the status of the article or save the article in Wikipedia main space. Cassiopeia talk 00:50, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Specific notability guidelines

5. If an editor creates an article about "2024 Summer Olympics" in 2019 without providing any sources, is the subject considered not notable and why?

Answer: The subject is not considered notable per Wikipedia:FUTUREEVENT since articles on future events must be verifiable and must "be of sufficiently wide interest that it would merit an article if the event had already occurred". Since there was not much interest/information available on the 2024 Olympics in 2019, it would not be considered notable.

Y. However, in reality, we could able to find source for 2024 in 2029 as Summer Olympics host nation would be announced 8 years prior to the event happen. As a patroller/reviewer for new page, if we think the subject meet GNG, then we could find the necessary independent, reliable sources and add in to the article as a good well so the article would be accepted and place in the Wikipedia main space. Cassiopeia talk 00:50, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

B. Without considered of sources/content policies and review just based on "subject specific notability" (SSN) "alone" for sake of the exercises below, please answer if the subject meets the SSN guidelines, based on the given content below, and specify under (1) which notability criteria they meet or fail (example - MUSICBI#1 if certain sub set of criteria is applicable) and (2) reasons/explanations.

6. A New York city based 2019 start up software company , specializing in data mining, has just received a USD 200K investor fund.

Answer: The company is not notable per Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) (specifically under Wikipedia:CORPTRIV) since an investment would be considered "a capital transaction, such as raised capital". This investment, unless so notably controversial/important that it gets sustained media coverage, would not be considered significant coverage.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:50, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

7. Nascimento Ferreira who is a Ultimate Fighting Championships fighters with the undefeated mixed martial arts record of 8-0.

Answer: Nascimento Ferreira does not meet Wikipedia:NMMA since he never was in the top 10 in his division according to fightmatrix. The highest rank he has ever achieved was #20.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:50, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

8. A upcoming action drama title "Suleiman the Great" based on the the life of Suleiman the Magnificent, was reported will be in production in December 2025 and to be released on August 2026 in the cinemas.

Answer: Suleiman the Great does not meet Wikipedia:Notability (films) since according to Wikipedia:NFF, a film should not have an article until after it is confirmed (by reliable sources) that it has exited principal photography. Since the film has not even started production, it should not have an article because films get cancelled all the time.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:50, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

9. A political candidates, without any previous or current political position, who is running for November 2025 election for a Senator position in United States with multiple local newspapers coverage of his candidacy.

Answer: The political candidate does not meet Wikipedia:Notability (people) (more specifically Wikipedia:NPOL) because the candidate has not been elected to any position yet, nor have any major/non-local newspapers reported on him in a non-routine fashion (assuming that said coverage is only relating to his candidacy).

Y. Good. Cassiopeia talk 00:50, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

10. A singer who self produced his first album in May 2019 and his songs are listed in Spotify.

Answer: The singer is not notable per Wikipedia:SINGER since he did not publish through a major record label/established indie label, and does not meet any other standard of notability outlined there. Merely being on Spotify does not establish notability, since anyone can upload songs there if they pay for a distributor.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:50, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

C. Based on which SSN guidelines the below subjects are notable under (1) which notability criteriaMUSICBI#1 (if certain sub set of criteria is applicable) and (2) reasons/explanations

11. Carlos Alós-Ferrer

Answer: Alós-Ferrer is notable per Wikipedia:Notability (academics) under "the person has been the head or chief editor of a major, well-established academic journal in their subject area." Alós-Ferrer is the editor-in-chief of Journal of Economic Psychology, which is a major journal in the field of behavioral psychology.

Y. Need to list all SSNs and all criterion. subject meets WP:NPROF #1 - see [1] for being highly cited (note - academics usually do not receive enough independent sources (reliable source yes) that talk about them, so at time we would use scholar google cited info to in the AfD (article for deletion) discussion so the article might be closed as a "keep", we will discuss AfD in later assingment.) ; :#5, His academic position as the NOMIS Professor for Decision and Neuroeconomics Theory is a named, endowed position and #8 as the chief editor of Journal of Economic Psychology [2]. Cassiopeia talk 00:50, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

12. Alistair Overeem

Answer: Overeem is notable per Wikipedia:NMMA, because he is ranked #6 in his division and was ranked #2 in 2017, according to fightmatrix.

Y. Need to list all SSNs and all criterion - Meet WP:NKICK - criterion 1, 2; WP:NMMA - criterion 1, 2.. Cassiopeia talk 00:50, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

13. Jennifer LopezAnswer: Lopez is reliable per Wikipedia:SINGER since she has been the subject of multiple reliable independent sources (there is numerous media coverage of her), she has had multiple singles/albums on Billboard Hot 100, many of Lopez's albums have received certified gold, there is plenty of press coverage of her tours, and she was signed to Universal Music Group which is a major record publisher.

Y Need to list all SSNs and all criterion. WP:ENTERTAINER - 1,2,3; WP:SINGER - all criteria. Cassiopeia talk 00:50, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

14. Three Mile Island accident

Answer: The Three Mile Island accident is notable per Wikipedia:Notability (events) since the incident was lasting (it led to new regulations about nuclear plants), it was reported on internationally, there has been a book published by a reliable publisher solely about the event (Three Mile Island: A Nuclear Crisis in Historical Perspective, published by University of California Press), and that book was written in 2006, 27 years after the event.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:50, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

15. Persepolis

Answer:

Persepolis is notable per Wikipedia:NCITY because it once was a populated place (the capital of the Achaemenid Empire). It also is a UNESCO World Heritage site, which also helps establishing notability.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 00:50, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

---

Grumpylawnchair Good day. See assignment 1 above. For all the assignments, pls provide

(1) Hist diffs of the articles, reverts, edits, reports, results of the reports, guidelines, talk page messages, and any hist diff that is applicable. Pls provide guidelines where applicable and justify/explain in details of your application or analysis.

(2) Pls ping me if you need assistance (here in this program page at the communication section of every assignment).

(3) Pls book mark this page on your computer for ease to find this page.

(4) Please book mark this page and ping me when you have finished the assignment for me to review.

Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia talk 02:12, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

@Cassiopeia: - I finished. Grumpylawnchair (talk) 16:06, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

@Cassiopeia: I'm not sure if I pinged you properly last time so I'll try again. Grumpylawnchair (talk) 17:02, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

@Grumpylawnchair: See in "source editing mode" on how I ping you (just subsititu your name after the "|" (pipe) symbol. Reviewed and please see comments. Ensure all necessary information (SSN/SGN and their criteria) is included for Part B. Refer to the comments and examples in the answers/reviews for guidance. Let me know if you have any questions or you are ready to move on to the next assignment. Stay safe and Happy New Year. Cassiopeia talk 00:50, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

@Grumpylawnchair: Please see above message and reply.02:04, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

@Cassiopeia: I've reviewed everything, may I go on to the next lesson? Grumpylawnchair (talk) 21:05, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

---

Sources and content policy

A. Sources

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia for such content claimed should be supported by independent (secondary), reliable sources for verification. Please read WP:RS, WP:IS, WP:RSP, WP:V, WP:PROVEIT, WP:Primary, WP:Secondary, and WP:Tertiary and answered the the below questions in your own words.

You could contact WP:RX if you could not find the sources yourself either on web due to Paywall content or printed books.

---

1.

Topic	Explanation	5 Examples	Comment by Cass
Reliable source	A reliable source is reputable, has a reputation for accuracy and fact-checking, and is independent of the subject.	(example)The Guardian newspaper The New York Times - American newspaper of record The Hindu - Indian newspaper of record Nature (journal) - widely-cited peer-reviewed scientific journal Gazeta Wyborcza - Polish newspaper of record Rzeczpospolita (newspaper) - Polish newspaper of record	Y. Reliable sources are those that are published, are known for fact-checking and accuracy and are independent of the subject of the article. In reliability the context matters - the age of the source, it's author and publisher all influence the reliability. See Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources for supplement to the reliable sources guideline. Cassiopeia talk 21:43, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
User generated sources	User generated sources are sources in which most, if not all of the content is provided by users. The vast majority of wikis, including Wikipedia, fall into this category.	Facebook Instagram Twitter TV Tropes Uncyclopedia	Y. Cassiopeia talk 21:43, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
Non Independent source	Non-independent sources are generated by, or with significant input from, the subject. They may present the subject in a unflinchingly positive light and fail to mention any negative aspects of the subject.	Daily Sabah - considered a mouthpiece of the Turkish government Sputnik (news agency) - mouthpiece of the Russian government RIA Novosti - mouthpiece of the Russian government Xinhua News Agency - mouthpiece of the Chinese government Belarusian Telegraph Agency - mouthpiece of the Belorussian government	Y. Cassiopeia talk 21:43, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

---

2.

Type	Explanation	Sources (15 Primary ; 5 Secondary ; 5 Tertiary)	Comment by Cass
Primary	Primary sources are written by people who are directly involved with the subject.	(example) scientific journal articles reporting experimental research results historical documents government documents court ruling press release social media post blog Github commits Youtube comments Reddit threads Linkedin profile personal website letters telegrams interview transcripts advertisements Amazon listings	Y. Good work. Primary sources also include Diary, Memoirs, Letters, Autobiography, Research paper , A work of art, Novel (by the author), Film (by the film director), Personal webpage, Press release, Photographs, Video and audio recordings, Autobiographies, Government documents (Declaration of Independence), Scrapbooks, Artifacts, Interviews, Speeches, Poems, Songs, Case studies, Manuscripts etc. Cassiopeia talk 21:43, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
Secondary	Secondary sources are written by people who are independent of the subject.	(example) newspaper books thesis papers journal article magazine websites	Y. Secondary sources also include A book about a topic Documentaries, Book or Flim Reviews, Scientific journals (analyzing already existing data) and etc Cassiopeia talk 21:43, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
Tertiary	A tertiary source summarizes the content of secondary sources.	(example) encyclopedias textbooks Wikipedia manuals handbooks indexes	Y. Dictionaries, Textbooks and etc. Cassiopeia talk 21:43, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

---

3.

Subject	Primary	Secondary	Tertiary	Comment by Cass
Example: Art	Example:Sculpture	Example:Article critiquing the sculpture	Example:Encyclopedic article on the sculptor
History	A historical document	An article in an academic journal about the historical topic	A textbook chapter on the historical topic	Y. Cassiopeia talk 21:43, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
Science	An academic paper recording the results of groundbreaking research	A journal article about said research	A medical textbook talking about the research	Y. Cassiopeia talk 21:43, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
Athletes	The athlete's official social media page	A newspaper article on the athlete	An encyclopedia article on the athlete	Y. Cassiopeia talk 21:43, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

---

4. Please explain in your own words why the content claimed needs to be verified?

Answer:

Content needs to be verified because without citations, Wikipedia would be little more than a blog. It keeps editors accountable for ensuring that their edits are factual, especially with BLPs, and provides a means for other editors and for users to easily verify the article's content.

5.Could we used Wikipedia as the source? and why?

Answer: We cannot use Wikipedia as a source per WP:CIRCULAR because Wikipedia is a user-generated source. Y. Cassiopeia talk 21:43, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

6.Give an example and explain why a source is reliable but not independent of a subject?

Answer: The official website of the president of Poland is considered a reliable source for the president of Poland's official activities, positions, and press releases, but is not independent of the Polish government. It is unlikely that said website would publish anything critical of the Polish government.

N.All governments, organizations, private companies, social media platforms, foundations, marketing agencies, educational institutions, blogs, and similar entities are often deemed unreliable due to the lack of established mechanisms for fact-checking and ensuring accuracy. Who will verify the information provided by the government if it originates from the primary source itself? If a reputable newspaper reports information from the government, and that newspaper is recognized as a credible reliable source, we should rely on the newspaper rather than the government source, even if the information is identical. The reputable source is expected to conduct the necessary fact-checking. Cassiopeia talk 21:43, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

7.Give an example and explain why a source is independent source but not reliable?

Answer: Stormfront is independent of most things except for itself, but as a Neo-Nazi hate forum, it should not be used on Wikipedia as a source except for attribution of quotes made by its operators.

Y. Cassiopeia talk 21:43, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

---

Pls indicate "y" for yes or "n" for no or "?" after "ind", "rel" and "sig" (see first example) and give a brief explanation of why you place "y" or "n".

8.

David Petraeus

David Howell Petraeus AO (/pɪˈtreɪ.əs/; born November 7, 1952) is a retired United States Army general and public official. He served as Director of the Central Intelligence Agency from September 6, 2011, until his resignation on November 9, 2012 after his affair with Paula Broadwell was reported.

Petraeus was born in Cornwall-on-Hudson, New York, the son of Sixtus Petraeus (1915–2008), a sea captain from Franeker, Netherlands.

In 2003, Petraeus commanded the 101st Airborne Division in the fall of Baghdad

Source assessment table

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/11/09/david-petraeus-cia-resign-nbc/1695271/	The source is major newspaper	The source is reputable published source	The source discusses the subject directly and in detail	✔ Yes
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2011/09/06/petraeus-sworn-into-cia.cnn?iref=allsearch	CNN is not affiliated with the subject in any way	CNN is a major national news channel	The video is completely about him	✔ Yes
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/david-petraeus-paula-broadwell_n_2118893	Huffpost has nothing to do with the subject	Huffpost is reliable for non-political topics, per WP:HUFFPOST	Article is pretty much all about him	✔ Yes
https://www.geni.com/people/Sixtus-Petraeus/6000000015418360012	Source has nothing to do with him	It's a random website about surnames with no reputation	It's not even about him, its about his father; only mentions David Petraeus once	✘ No
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2010/05/petraeus-exclusive-201005	Not affiliated with him in any way	Vanity Fair is a reliable source, per WP:VANITYFAIR	the article is only about him	✔ Yes
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/beyond/interviews/petraeus.html	Interview with him, so he provides most of the content	PBS is a reputable national news outlet	Interview is only with him about him	✘ No
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/david-petraeus-general-surge-401740.html	The writer has nothing to do with the subject	The Independent is a reputable national newspaper	The article is only about him	✔ Yes
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

References

YWe usually will take digital/press source. (The cnn video source was a dead link above - the source can be viewed here.

(1). For video especially in Utube, We need to look where the info is reported. If it is reported by news channel such as cnn, bbc etc then that would be considered reliable, independent sources. Not all news channel are considered reliable for some of them are funded/own (fully or partly) by the local governments such as RT and Aljazeera. If the info is reported by some utubers (which most of the utube info are from) then that would be considered not independent and reliable. (2). Huffpost - Although HuffPost contributors is considered NOT reliable in WP:RSP but if we look closely, the piece is written by By ANNE FLAHERTY, KIMBERLY DOZIER AND ADAM GOLDMAN, THE ASSOCIATED PRESS. The Associated press is considered reliable source as they sell their news to other news agencies. However, the content is based on many individual opinions, for such I would talk it as not reliable sources. Cassiopeia talk 21:43, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

9. Please answer if the subject meets the "subject specific notability" guidelines, Which subject specific notability based on the given content above, and specify under (1) which notability criteria they meet or fail (example - MUSICBI#1 if certain sub set of criteria is applicable) and (2) reasons/explanations.

Pls answer:

---

10.

Jordan Lennon (born February 22, 2000), is a British film producer and actor. Lennon is currently a member of BAFTA. He continues to work aside 20th Century Fox, Warner Bros, Wicked Wales, Capture Studios, Cineworld, Paramount Pictures, and Rockefeller Foundation.

At age 16, the Vice President of 20th Century Fox, Paul Higginson. Who previously worked on Star Wars, Titanic, and Independence Day took on Jordan and Rowan Snow as a mentor. In December 2018, Jordan and Rowan finished British Film Academy. Jordan lived in Skelmersdale for 10 years before moving to Rhyl, North Wales. He's currently writing 'Stranger in the Night' scrreenplay for Warner Brothers.

Source assessment table

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm8902348/				? Unknown
http://www.bafta.org/wales	Lennon is a member of BAFTA	BAFTA is not expected to publish any negative information about their members because they want to retain members	Link goes to their Wales homepage. which says nothing about him	✘ No
https://www.linkedin.com/in/jordan-d-98111a125				? Unknown
https://www.behindthevoiceactors.com/Jordan-David/	Is not associated with the subject in any way	Is reliable for role credits, per WP:RSPBTVA	Per WP:RSPBTVA, BTVA's coverage is routine and does not contribute to establishing notability; also profile isn't even him	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

References

• The first link is dead so I'm leaving that one blank for now. -
• Third link its prompting me to log in, so I'll leave that one blank for now.

Y both linkedin and imdb links are dead links. Cassiopeia talk

11. Please answer if the subject meets the "subject specific notability" guidelines, Which subject specific notability based on the given content above, and specify under (1) which notability criteria they meet or fail (example - MUSICBI#1 if certain sub set of criteria is applicable) and (2) reasons/explanations.

---

12.

Martina Hingis is a Swiss former professional tennis player. She won five Grand Slam singles titles. Hingis was one of the highest-paid female athletes in 2000. She retired in November 2007 after being hampered by a hip injury for several months and testing positive for a metabolite of cocaine during that year's Wimbledon Championships, which led to a two-year suspension from the sport.

Source assessment table

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.instagram.com/martinahingis80/	Her personal instagram page is controlled by her	She can post anything she wants on her social media, with no factchecking	Her instagram page is mostly about her	✘ No
https://www.latimes.com/sports/more/la-sp-us-open-hingis-20170910-story.html	The LA Times has nothing to do with the subject	The LA Times is a reputable national newspaper	The article is mostly about her	✔ Yes
				? Unknown
https://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/id/21171438/tennis-another-twist-bizarre-career-martina-hingis	ESPN is not involved with Hingis	ESPN is a reliable source	Article is mostly about Hingis	✔ Yes
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2007/nov/01/tennis	The Guardian has nothing to do with Hingis	The Guardian is a reputable newspaper	The article is mostly about her	✔ Yes
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

References

• I can't access source #3, so I'll leave that blank for now.

Y Source is here. Full content from the article Martina Hingis would pass all the WP:NTENNIS criteria. Cassiopeia talk 21:43, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

13. Please answer if the subject meets the "subject specific notability" guidelines, Which subject specific notability based on the given content above, and specify under (1) which notability criteria they meet or fail (example - MUSICBI#1 if certain sub set of criteria is applicable) and (2) reasons/explanations.

---

14.

Fallingwater, Mill Run, Pennsylvania (1937)

Frank Lloyd Wright (June 8, 1867 – April 9, 1959) was an American architect, interior designer, writer, and educator. Wright believed in designing structures that were in harmony with humanity and its environment, a philosophy he called organic architecture. His creative period spanned more than 70 years. He works includes The Guggenheim, swirling, snail-shaped museum in the middle of Manhattan. Fallingwater, which has been called "the best all-time work of American architecture." This is one of Wright's most famous private residences (completed 1937), was built for Mr. and Mrs. Edgar J. Kaufmann, Sr., at Mill Run, Pennsylvania. Constructed over a 30-foot waterfall, it was designed according to Wright's desire to place the occupants close to the natural surroundings. The house was intended to be more of a family getaway, rather than a live-in home.

Source assessment table

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://nypost.com/2017/06/07/frank-lloyd-wright-was-a-house-builder-and-homewrecker/	The source is major newspaper	The source is reputable published source	The source discusses the subject directly and in detail	✔ Yes
https://franklloydwright.org/work/	He controls his own personal website	He can publish anything he wants on his personal website	His personal website is all about him	✘ No
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/jul2004/nf20040728_3153_db078.htm				? Unknown
https://books.google.com/books?id=KSA1HTTU-eMC	Author is independent of Wright	Wiley is a reliable academic publisher	Is all about him, since its a biography of him	✔ Yes
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

• BTW NYPost is not considered a reliable source, per Wikipedia:NYPOST.
• Link 3 is dead

Y. Link 3 is here. NY Post is considered not reliable source - pls see list of source guide here - (1) New_pages_patrol_source_guide and (2) Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources. (pls book mark this two pages for future reference.(importanant). Cassiopeia talk 21:43, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

15. Please answer if the subject meets the "subject specific notability" guidelines, Which subject specific notability based on the given content above, and specify under (1) which notability criteria they meet or fail (example - MUSICBI#1 if certain sub set of criteria is applicable) and (2) reasons/explanations.

---

Grumpylawnchair Good day. See assignment 2 above. Please ping me when you have finished with the assignment and ready for a review. Cassiopeia talk 21:41, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

@Cassiopeia: I did what I could - please see my comments for explanations of blank things. I can't finish the final "is this notable" questions on each subject without the dead links being repaired/replaced. Grumpylawnchair (talk) 22:05, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Grumpylawnchair See comments. Thank you for letting me know about the dead links. Please answer question 9, 11, 13 and 15 which you missed. When you have done, please ping me. Stay safe. Cassiopeia talk 21:43, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

References