Talk:Michael Mignano

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC
	This article was accepted from this draft on 10 May 2022 by reviewer TipsyElephant (talk · contribs).

Biography

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

Podcasting Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Podcasting, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of notable podcasts and podcast-related information 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.PodcastingWikipedia:WikiProject PodcastingTemplate:WikiProject Podcastingpodcasting
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

The Monitor

Conflict of interest

Hello Cowfish1, thank you for making the improvements that you did. I just wanted to ask whether you are in any way connected to Michael Mignano. If not, great. If so, you should definitely declare the WP:COI. TipsyElephant (talk) 02:20, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! No, I'm not. Cowfish1 (talk) 22:36, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I see that the latest revision was rejected for a lack of citations. I had more citations in the previous iteration, but removed some due to prior feedback that there were too many in that version. Is there a recommended amount of citations for this post? I'm submitted a new draft now with a few additional citations. Thank you. Cowfish1 (talk) 00:29, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Cowfish1: sorry for the confusion. Basically, my advice is to avoid citing anymore than two or three sources for any given sentence because unless the sentence contains controversial information a single source should be plenty to verify the information. I also recommended reducing the number of sources because there were quite a few unreliable sources and because it's significantly easier for reviewers to determine whether the subject is notable if they don't have to comb through dozens of low quality sources in pursuit of two or three good ones. We really only need WP:THREESOURCES to clearly dwmonstrate that a subject passes WP:N or in this case WP:BIO. TipsyElephant (talk) 02:15, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AfC source analysis

I don't think the sources are quite enough right now so I've laid out my reasoning below. I would recommend merging content into Anchor (app) instead because most of these sources focus on the application rather than the person.

Source analysis
Source	Independent	Significant	Reliable	Contributes to notability
Fast Company	No, this is an interview	Yes	Yes	No
Fortune	Yes	Maybe, I guess...it's pretty limited, but it's also kind of an award of sorts	Yes	Sure
Search Engine Journal	Yes	No, this name checks the person once without any information about Mignano	Yes	No
Fast Company	No, this is mostly made up of direct quotes from the person	No, Mignano's name is only mentioned a few times without any substantial coverage	Yes	No
Variety	Yes	No, this name checks the person once without any information about Mignano	Yes	No
Wall Street Journal	Yes	No, this source doesn't even mention Mignano a single time	Yes	No
New York Times	Yes	No, this source doesn't even mention Mignano a single time	Yes	No
Axios	No, the information comes directly from Mignano	No, Mignano's name is only mentioned a couple times without any substantial coverage	Yes	No
SXSW	No, the source is promoting its own event that Mignano spoke at	No, this is mostly just listing Mignano in a list of credits	Maybe	No
Podcast Show London	No, the source is promoting its own event that Mignano spoke at	No, this is a short profile/blurb about Mignano	Maybe	No

TipsyElephant (talk) 14:40, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for listing this. I'll add a few more. Cowfish1 (talk) 00:32, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

thanks! I just added a few more reliable, and non-trivial mentions. Cowfish1 (talk) 15:29, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Cowfish1: you're welcome. Right now the biggest issue is that many of your sources only contain a WP:TRIVIALMENTION of Mignano. The reliability of your sources have improved significantly since you started the draft. If you want a quick and easy overview of expectations of sources you might want to read WP:GOLDENRULE. TipsyElephant (talk)

@Cowfish1: I've accepted the draft based of the sources you've added, however, I would still consider most of the coverage relatively routine or insignificant. If someone else decides that they don't believe Michael Mignano passes WP:BIO they will open an WP:AFD and the Wikipedia community will come to a WP:CONSENSUS as to what should be done with the article (i.e. merging the content to Anchor (app), deletion, or keep and improve the article). I'm accepting the draft because I think it has a decent shot in an AfD discussion. TipsyElephant (talk) 15:23, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback from New Page Review process

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Nice work.

North8000 (talk) 17:28, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]