Talk:Maite Hontelé

Notability

@SshibumXZ: Why don't you use the talk page yourself and explain what you think needs additional references (maybe you don't speak Spanish? Everything in the article is in the references) and why you think a musician who published five albums about which countless media wrote and who was nominated for a Grammy with one may not meet notability requirements? A quick web search for her should have settled the issue, in case you have the time for something productive like this instead of posting ugly templates. Crotopaxi (talk) 21:55, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

@Crotopaxi: the {{refimprove}} template does not signify a lack of reliable, secondary sources, but rather — in my opinion — equates to the article needing more reliable, secondary references, that may clear things up. Also, you do not need to get personal about this, I myself have created more than two dozen Wikipedia articles, so, I do have a good idea of Wikipedia's general notability guidelines. As for the notability template, yeah that was mistake and would be rectified in less than a day.
Regards, SshibumXZ (Talk) (Contributions). 22:09, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

If you could take the time to specify what needs to be cleared up? Sorry to say that this time apparently you very just careless about notability guidelines. You are welcome to select any of the thousands of reliable independent sources I linked to that you think could help. Crotopaxi (talk) 22:14, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

@Crotopaxi: the article, as a whole, needs more references, and also needs expansion. I am also kind of aware of WP:NMUSIC, I have tagged a lot of articles for speedy deletion. Again, neither am I that well versed about musicians, nor am I that interested in them, you are very welcome to improve the article. I do not think any further discussion to be had regarding this, hence, I bid you good day.
Regards, SshibumXZ (Talk) (Contributions). 23:04, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

@SshibumXZ: Of course a stub can always benefit of expansion and you are welcome to contribute. However, the template you chose shows together with what you write you have a poor understanding of verifiability. Crotopaxi (talk) 00:39, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

The referencing could be better but the insistence on verifiability is uncalled for. The statement "(born in 1980) is a Dutch trumpeter from Haaften who was nominated for best salsa album with Déjame así (2013) at the a 15th Annual Latin Grammy Awards in 2014". is sourced to . If we break that down to:

• She was born in 1980 N
• She is Dutch Y
• She is a trumpeter Y
• She was born in Haaften Y
• She was nominated for best salsa album with Déjame así (2013) at the a 15th Annual Latin Grammy Awards in 2014.Y

We notice that only one those claims are not supported by the source, but the very next source, gives us "que nació en 1980". Even people who do not speak any Spanish ought to be able to figure out that the means she was born in 1980. That should suffice, in my opinion. There's no need for more sources to verify the claims. Vexations (talk) 01:14, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

References

@Crotopaxi and Vexations: I never intended to say that the claims in the article are either unverified or false, my interpretation of {{refimprove}} is that it can also be used — in stubs — to signify that the article may need more citations, not that any info in it unverifiable, I would do the opposite from next time on, if that's okay with you two. Also, my understanding of verifiability is fine, thank you very much.
Regards, SshibumXZ (Talk) (Contributions). 16:50, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Per the template: "This template indicates that the article needs additional inline citations. This template should be used only for articles where there are some, but insufficient, inline citations to support the material currently in the article. Don't use this tag for articles that contain no unreferenced material, even if all the material is supported by a single citation." Emphasis mine. Vexations (talk) 16:55, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

@Vexations: I understand that, and would use {{better source}} from now on. I would also use {{citation style}} if I have reason to believe that an article's referencing style needs improvement. I appreciate that both of you pointed to me the problems with {{refimprove}}. I bid both of you good day!
Regards, SshibumXZ (Talk) (Contributions). 17:10, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

@SshibumXZ: I see your point about the templates. {{better source}} says "inline citations but which are to insufficiently reliable sources". That doesn't fit here either. {{citation style}} says "This template should not be used with stubs." So this is also wrong here. I completely agree though that this article is a stub and thus would benefit from expansion and more references and that a template could help to notify users of this and bring them here to help. I saw there is a project to sort stubs and there are sub-templates {{trumpeter-stub}} and {{Netherlands-music-bio-stub}}. Maybe this helps? Crotopaxi (talk) 02:02, 16 April 2018 (UTC)