Jump to content

Draft talk:Simon Petermann

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  1. REDIRECT Draft talk:Jaime Schmidt

Reference evaluation

[edit]

Per Special:Diff/1181056348. --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 16:46, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reference evaluation
Ref number Source Secondary Independent Reliable Significant coverage Comment
1 Soundpainting No Yes Yes No Seems to be a certification page; shouldn't contribute towards notability
2 Pakt-Bern No No Yes Yes Not independent, because the page allows its members to host a "personal portrait page" on their server (which was referenced here).
3 Sandy Brown Jazz Yes Yes Yes No Seems to be an independent Jazz Magazine that qualifies as a source here on Wikipedia; however, it doesn't discuss this draft's subject in great detail.
4 Dampfzentrale No No No No Dampfzentrale is a place at which events are hosted; they have an obvious interest in promoting artists that perform there; doesn't discuss the subject though.
5 Jazztime Yes Yes Yes Yes Jazztime seems like an independent source and it has an article on the subject that discusses him in sufficient detail. It seems to promote the subject (there are links to his web pages), but that is commonplace in German-language sources and not indicative of not ticking the independence criterion.
6 Platinumlist No No No No Platinumlist is a place at which events are hosted; they have an obvious interest in promoting artists that perform there; doesn't discuss the subject though.
7 Pro Helvetia No No Yes No The source is clearly labeled as an "artists's tale", i.e., not an independent source; also doesn't discuss the subject.
8 Moods No No No No Seems to be a Jazz Club; not a secondary or independent source, and doesn't discuss the subject.
9 Unit Records No No Yes No Unit Records seems to be a music publisher; not a secondary or independent source, and doesn't discuss the subject.
10 Porgy.at No No No No Seems to be a Jazz Club; not a secondary or independent source, and doesn't discuss the subject.
11 Uptownband No No No No Seems to be a band; not a secondary or independent source, and doesn't discuss the subject.
12 Pro Helvetia No No Yes Yes Clearly not an independent source
13 Andreas Wiesmann No No No No A personal blog; doesn't make any sense to cite this as a source in any Wikipedia article
14 YouTube No No No No Doesn't need any explaining I reckon
15 ZHdK No Yes Yes No ZHdK are generally a reliable source, but it doesn't discuss the subject, and the cited page is also an announcement for an exhibition and thus not well-suited for a Wikipedia article
16 Luzerner Zeitung Yes Yes Yes No Good source, but no significant coverage
17 OT301 No No Yes No Definitely not an independent source; also doesn't look like significant coverage
18 MoonMot No No Yes Yes The subject's band's homepage; a reliable source, but not independent.
19 Schweizer Musikzeitung Yes Yes Yes No Good source, but no significant coverage
20 Jazzthing Yes Yes Yes No A good source, but the cited article is a concert announcement, and there is no significant coverage.
21 Scenenow Yes No Yes No A reasonable source, but not an independently written article; since it's an announcement for "Waking the Giants" I'd argue that it's no sigcov.
22 Hochschule Luzern No No Yes No This is a press release and doesn't discuss the subject.