Talk:Herbert Diess

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography

Automobiles Low‑importance

	Cars portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Automobiles, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of automobiles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AutomobilesWikipedia:WikiProject AutomobilesTemplate:WikiProject AutomobilesAutomobile
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Germany Low‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Herbert Diess 1.JPG

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:21, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Image was uploaded to commons in 2013 by RudolfSimon. Copied to thetruthaboutcars.com without crediting source in 2016, so... --Dennis Bratland (talk) 22:12, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notability has been established

Can Walter Görlitz or whomever thinks there is a notability problem here please explain what it is? There are sources cited here that demonstrate sustained coverage in multiple independent sources. Without any explanation, I'm going to remove the {{notability}} tag for the third time. Please dont' edit war further if without explaining your reasons. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 01:06, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Bloomberg is a database entry, not a detailed discussion on the subject. The VW link is associated with the subject and cannot be used.

I'm not sure that ceoworld.biz is a reliable source, but let's assume it is, and it discusses the subject at length.

The first piece in autonews.com discusses with the subject at length, but it's not about the subject.

The second piece appears to be behind a pay wall, what I can tell about it is that it's Diess talking about the new VW electric line, not about Diess.

That leaves one possibly RS. WP:NBIO and WP:GNG come into play here.

I suspect that the subject is notable, but the sources do not show it. That's why the template is there. Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:06, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Interviews of course establish notability. National media publish 2,000 word interviews of presidents and Nobel Prize winners and influential authors and artists. The local grocer gets a 50 word Q&A in a weekly advertising supplement, or does not get interviewed at all. The difference between these two kinds of interviews is their notability. Pay walled or offline articles are your problem, not mine. We don't delete articles because of one editor's access issues, per WP:PAYWALL and WP:OFFLINE. You can verify sources, or ask another editor to verify them, at the Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request, Wikipedia:Reference desk, and Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library. The notability policy explains this at WP:NEXIST: " Notability requires only the existence of suitable independent, reliable sources, not their immediate presence or citation in an article." And by "existence" it means Published; it links to that info page to remind us that "the mere fact that an item is no longer available online, without cost, or in a retail store is insufficient to nullify its status as accessible. If the item is available online or at a library, it is still considered accessible." The possibility of finding a published source is sufficient, and unless you have actual evidence that another editor is deliberately trying to mislead you or misrepresent a source, the Assume good faith policy requires -- requires -- that you accept it sight unseen.

That aside, it isn't really that hard to find even more coverage of Diess:

Agence France-Presse 755 words
Associated Press 636 words
NY Times 966 words
NY Times 642 words
Chicago Tribune 543 words
Financial Times 964 words

Etc etc. There's a certain amount of due diligence required on your part; you can't just drive-by tag articles because the evidence of notability isn't quite as convenient as you'd prefer. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 16:35, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Interviews do not always establish notability. I never complained about the paywall other than it made reading the article more difficult. AGF means I have to assume you're not a malevolent actor. It says nothing about your claim. Actually, I can drive-by tag the article. And WP:BEFORE states that I have to do due diligence before I nominate an article for deletion, which is why I didn't take you up on that offer earlier. It is not about tagging an article. In fact, the WP:BURDEN is on you to provide citation to avoid tagging. But I write this to an editor who doesn't know about MOS:INDENTGAP or how to avoid creating backlinks. Your additional sources help show the subject is notable, thanks. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:15, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See this discussion about interviews and how they do not contribute to notability: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard&curid=11424955&diff=891303208&oldid=891297731 Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:08, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]