Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WikiTree (2nd nomination): Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→WikiTree: Reply |
Citation bot (talk | contribs) Alter: issue. Add: volume, doi-access, page, title. Changed bare reference to CS1/2. | Use this bot. Report bugs. | Suggested by Headbomb | #UCB_toolbar |
||
| (29 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
<div class="boilerplate afd vfd xfd-closed archived mw-archivedtalk" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.''
<!--Template:Afd top
Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links to create a new discussion page using the name format of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination)]]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->
The result was '''keep'''__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. This is a very confusing discussion. Much of it centers on discussing the merits or problems with the article subject (which isn't relevant here or on the article Talk page) and there are three conflicting source analysis which might have all been done by the same editor (in the future please include your username at the top of the table). But overall, I see that there are at least a couple sources establishing notability and a general sentiment to Keep this article and to continue to clean it up. For editors who are fans of this site or who dislike it, please take that discussion off Wikipedia and to a review site or the blogosphere...it doesn't belong in an encyclopedia. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">[[User:Liz|'''''L'''''iz]]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">[[Special:Contributions/Liz|'''''Read!''''']] [[User talk:Liz|'''''Talk!''''']]</sup> 21:52, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
===[[:WikiTree]]===
<div class="other-afds" style="width:33%; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #f8f9fa; color: black; margin: 0.5em 0 0.5em 1em; padding: 0.2em; float: right; clear: right; font-size: 88%; min-width:20em; max-width: 100%">AfDs for this article:
{{Special:Prefixindex/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WikiTree}}
Line 13 ⟶ 19:
*:Keep the page, fix it up so that it meets Wikipedia standards, and let the disgruntled members take their criticisms to Yelp! [[User:DMRand|DMRand]] ([[User talk:DMRand|talk]]) 03:30, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
*::Are you aware that of the "more than one million registered users," only 232,460 have signed the Honor Code as of just now (https://www.wikitree.com/index.php?title=Special:Badges&b=genealogist) and thus are fully enabled to edit profiles? And that management's own estimate is that only a few thousand are currently active contributors (https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/351001/how-many-genealogists-have-contributed-to-wikitree?show=351276#c351276)? [[Special:Contributions/2600:1010:B181:CD66:45D3:2A9D:92DC:EC52|2600:1010:B181:CD66:45D3:2A9D:92DC:EC52]] ([[User talk:2600:1010:B181:CD66:45D3:2A9D:92DC:EC52|talk]]) 19:17, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
*'''
*:Thank you very much for a prompt and balanced response [[User:Belle Fast|Belle Fast]] ([[User talk:Belle Fast|talk]]) 11:07, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
*::That previous AfD nomination and subsequent deletion are not relevant to the current situation. Apparently the earlier AfD was for an article about a different entity named "WikiTree." It appears from the Wayback Machine that the site called WikiTree in 2005 and 2006 had the same domain owner, but that site apparently was taken down. The WikiTree.com site covered by the current article asserts (at https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Help:About_WikiTree) that the site opened in 2008. [[User:Orlady|Orlady]] ([[User talk:Orlady|talk]]) 18:52, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
Line 22 ⟶ 28:
*'''Keep'''. There are relevant scholarly articles that have utilized data provided by WikiTree. Notably, the research papers titled 'Quantitative Analysis of Genealogy Using Digitised Family Trees' and 'Data Mining of Online Genealogy Datasets for Revealing Lifespan Patterns in Human Population' have relied on the data offered by WikiTree. These references demonstrate the value and importance of WikiTree as a resource for researchers and academics in the field of genealogy and population studies. While the absence of some outside sources may be a valid concern, it is crucial to recognize that Wikipedia itself is an ever-evolving platform, and the absence of cited external sources at a particular moment does not necessarily warrant deletion. As a community-driven encyclopedia, Wikipedia should strive to provide comprehensive coverage of notable subjects, and WikiTree undoubtedly falls within that category. [[Special:Contributions/2601:2C5:4700:310:3A14:457E:FCB5:7AE2|2601:2C5:4700:310:3A14:457E:FCB5:7AE2]] ([[User talk:2601:2C5:4700:310:3A14:457E:FCB5:7AE2|talk]]) 15:20, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
*:From the first of these learned papers, I quote: “The data we use were provided by WikiTree, a free, collaborative worldwide family tree project created by a community of amateur genealogists. Data are available on 6.67 million people in over 160 countries (but mainly the US, UK, Germany, Canada, New Zealand and Holland) going as far back as the 1st century …... Data were validated by WikiTree using their in-house procedures which include checking source materials and by making individuals' profiles editable only by a limited list of users, and we provided additional validation by comparing lifespans in the data with those reported by third party sources.”<ref>''Quantitative Analysis of Genealogy Using Digitised Family Trees'' Michael Fire, Thomas Chesney & Yuval Elovici September 2, 2014 https://archive.org/details/arxiv-1408.5571 retrieved 4 August 2023</ref>
*:The three authors betray a considerable degree of naivety. WikiTree members are indeed amateurs and most of their work shows it. Fiction plays a strong part in many of their trees, hence the ludicrous claim of descents from the 1st century. An example is the profile for “Tiberius Claudius Caesar Britannicus Born before 12 Feb 41 in Rome, Italy Son of father unknown and Valeria Messalina Brother of Claudia Octavia Died 11 Feb 55 after age 13 in Rome, Italy”<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Brittanicus-1 | title=Tiberius Claudius Caesar Brittanicus (Bef.0041-0055) | WikiTree FREE Family Tree }}</ref> The only source cited for this rather distant ancestor is Wikipedia!
*:As for the unbelievable claim that data for 6.67 million people was validated by WikiTree, one has only to look at random cases from the past twenty centuries or even just the last couple of centuries to find endless examples of people with no credible source at all. The whole set-up is flawed and shoddy. Restricting editing powers to certfied users may limit the amount of fake info being added, but will they ever be able to clean up millions of valueless profles already there?
*:I'm sorry, but I do not believe that a survey like this can whitewash WikiTree and do not think it should count against deletion. [[User:Belle Fast|Belle Fast]] ([[User talk:Belle Fast|talk]]) 19:07, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
Line 30 ⟶ 36:
* '''Keep''' There doesn't appear to be even an attempt by the nominator to address the reliable source coverage already used in the article? Difficult to claim non-notability when there's no discussion of existing sourcing in relation to said notability. I've done a brief search and found several more usable sources as well.
:* {{cite journal |last1=Patton-Imani |first1=Sandra |date=2018 |title=Legitimacy and the Transfer of Children: Adoption, Belonging, and Online Genealogy |url=https://www.proquest.com/docview/2582803033/288919154B3E4D32PQ |journal=Genealogy |volume=2 |issue=4 |page=37 |doi=10.3390/genealogy2040037 |access-date=August 5, 2023 |doi-access=free }}
:* {{cite news |last=Beidler |first=James M. |date=June 24, 2012 |title=Roots and Branches: New genealogical mantra - 'Collaboration' |url=https://www.proquest.com/docview/1021925089/288919154B3E4D32PQ |work=[[Lebanon Daily News]] |access-date=August 5, 2023}}
:* {{cite news |last=McGyver |first=Diane |date=November 13, 2012 |title=What's a WikiTree? |url=https://www.proquest.com/docview/1151258320/288919154B3E4D32PQ |work=[[Kings County Record]] |access-date=August 5, 2023}}
Line 77 ⟶ 83:
*:Pick a couple of GNG-good ones? [[User:Gråbergs Gråa Sång|Gråbergs Gråa Sång]] ([[User talk:Gråbergs Gråa Sång|talk]]) 20:42, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' As with any wiki that allows edits from a community of users, there will be content that needs further examination and work to bring it up to standard. Example profiles following a set of style rules and standards: [https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Dewsbury-65 Dewsbury-65], [https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Calvert-613 Calvert-613]. The work done by volunteer contributors on WikiTree has been cited as a source in books, magazines, and newspaper articles. Example: {{cite news |author1=Wanner, Dick |title=Historic Black Inventor Made Grain Harvest Faster, Safer for Famers |url=https://www.newspapers.com/article/lancaster-farming/129612151/ |access-date=7 August 2023 |work=[[Lancaster Farming]] |issue=
*:Yeah, but "cited as a source" doesn't matter. [[WP:GNG]]-good coverage does. [[User:Gråbergs Gråa Sång|Gråbergs Gråa Sång]] ([[User talk:Gråbergs Gråa Sång|talk]]) 20:44, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
Line 86 ⟶ 92:
{{reflist-talk}}
:<p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"><span style="color: #FF6600;">'''{{resize|91%|[[Wikipedia:Deletion process#Relisting discussions|Relisted]] to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}'''</span><br />'''Relisting comment:''' Not all !votes are currently valid, but amongst those that are, it's not currently clear enough to call<br /><small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, [[User:Nosebagbear|Nosebagbear]] ([[User talk:Nosebagbear|talk]]) 12:05, 11 August 2023 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:XfD relist --
*'''Delete''' Not the easiest call, but I think this is a case where footnotes exist but they don't add up to notability. [[User:XOR'easter|XOR'easter]] ([[User talk:XOR'easter|talk]]) 18:03, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
Line 108 ⟶ 114:
*:{{reply-to|Doug Weller}} seems endemic to everything that's been going on with this article. Hopefully the closer can sort through it. I'd probably go back and unstrike my "SALT" vote because if it's deleted I think the advocates of this commercial "Wiki" will just come back and make it again. [[User:DIYeditor|—DIYeditor]] ([[User talk:DIYeditor|talk]]) 00:31, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
*::I'd argue that WikiTree is clearly a wiki with no quotes required, as each page represents a person, living or dead, or a place, document, factory, etc. And it is promised to be [https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Help:The_Free_Family_Tree free forever], although it is operated as a small ([https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Help:FAQ#Is_WikiTree_non-profit.3F seriously small]) business. I am not one of the single-digit number of [https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Help:WikiTree_Team paid staff team members], but clearly I should step back as I'm a user and fan. Perhaps the other fans, banned former users, and [[WP:IDONTLIKEIT]] folks should do the same? [[User:KarenJoyce|KarenJoyce]] ([[User talk:KarenJoyce|talk]]) 23:32, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
*:::Yeah you may be right about stepping back. Do you think that if everyone who has an opinion about the site recuses themselves the !vote will it be more balanced? I don't know where the line is on having a COI in that regard. [[User:DIYeditor|—DIYeditor]] ([[User talk:DIYeditor|talk]]) 14:07, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
*::::I don‘t think there’s a clear line in the policies/guidelines, but I think it would be good for the discussion if some of the !votes here were refactored. With their agreement, of course. [[User:Actualcpscm|Actualcpscm]]<sup> [[Special:Contributions/Actualcpscm|scrutinize]], [[User talk:Actualcpscm#top|talk]]</sup> 14:19, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
'''Comment''' Most of the debate here centers on the quality of Wikitree itself rather on whether it meets the ''admissibility'' criteria. Agree with [[User:KarenJoyce|KarenJoyce]]. [[User:Violette Martin|Violette Martin]] ([[User talk:Violette Martin|talk]]) 13:18, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Line 123 ⟶ 131:
:@[[User:Actualcpscm|Actualcpscm]] Thanks for working on this. On Roots and Branches, see my "Found LDN (#11) on ProQuest" comment above. [[User:Gråbergs Gråa Sång|Gråbergs Gråa Sång]] ([[User talk:Gråbergs Gråa Sång|talk]]) 08:58, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
:On DNA and SN, see [https://archive.org/details/dnasocialnetwork0000kenn/page/174/mode/2up?q=Wikitree]. [[User:Gråbergs Gråa Sång|Gråbergs Gråa Sång]] ([[User talk:Gråbergs Gråa Sång|talk]]) 09:04, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
:On the arxiv pdf, I'm not sure this was
{{ source assess table |
Line 334 ⟶ 342:
}}
{{ source assess
| source = Roots and Branches: New genealogical mantra - 'Collaboration' (https://www.proquest.com/docview/1021925089/7631C40EA5B24F09PQ/1?accountid=196403)
| ind =
| ind_just =
| rel =
| rel_just =
| sig =
| sig_just =
}}
{{ source assess
Line 388 ⟶ 396:
}}
}}
Here's the table for the sources at [[Talk:WikiTree#This_was_under_"References"_for_some_reason]]. I didn't analyse the last few, it's clear that there's a pattern here: they used WikiTree as a source and did not analyse it further, ergo no SIGCOV. [[User:Actualcpscm|Actualcpscm]]<sup> [[Special:Contributions/Actualcpscm|scrutinize]], [[User talk:Actualcpscm#top|talk]]</sup> 09:18, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
:Is the "Analyzing Digital Discourse" book actually about "our" Wikitree? I don't have good access. [[User:Gråbergs Gråa Sång|Gråbergs Gråa Sång]] ([[User talk:Gråbergs Gråa Sång|talk]]) 09:28, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
::{{checking}}, although it looked like it to me. [[User:Actualcpscm|Actualcpscm]]<sup> [[Special:Contributions/Actualcpscm|scrutinize]], [[User talk:Actualcpscm#top|talk]]</sup> 09:37, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
:::You're right, that's something else. Table and !vote have been amended accordingly. Thanks for pointing this out!
{{ source assess table |
{{ source assess
| source = https://www.google.it/books/edition/Analyzing_Digital_Discourse_and_Human_Be/9sSNCwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0
| ind = y
| ind_just =
| rel = y
| rel_just =
| sig = n
| sig_just = This is about a different WikiTree, more commonly stylized Wiki Tree. Darn.
}}
{{ source assess
| source = https://www.irelandxo.com/ireland-xo/news/tracing-your-roots-dna
| ind = y
| ind_just =
| rel = ?
| rel_just = Presumably yes.
| sig = n
| sig_just =
}}
{{ source assess
| source = https://www.jstor.org/stable/jj.1507441.11
| ind = y
| ind_just =
| rel = y
| rel_just =
| sig = n
| sig_just =
}}
{{ source assess
| source = https://books.google.it/books?id=IdWkEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA24&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false
| ind = y
| ind_just =
| rel = ?
| rel_just = Presumably yes.
| sig = n
| sig_just =
}}
{{ source assess
| source = https://www.lowcountryweekend.com/2023/04/11/international-african-american-museum-sets-spring-early-summer-programming/
| ind = y
| ind_just =
| rel = y
| rel_just =
| sig = n
| sig_just =
}}
{{ source assess
| source = https://eu.pressconnects.com/story/news/connections/2018/03/26/genealogy-roots-ancestry-stories/376788002/
| ind = y
| ind_just =
| rel = ?
| rel_just =
| sig = n
| sig_just =
}}
{{ source assess
| source = https://www-euppublishing-com.wikipedialibrary.idm.oclc.org/doi/epub/10.3366/brw.2020.0346
| ind = y
| ind_just =
| rel = y
| rel_just =
| sig = n
| sig_just = Passing mention.
}}
{{ source assess
| source = https://www.cairn.info/revue-population-2020-2-page-391.htm
| ind = y
| ind_just =
| rel = y
| rel_just =
| sig = n
| sig_just = Passing mention.
}}
{{ source assess
| source = https://www.proquest.com/docview/2655175415/8BF23F813A0D4F7EPQ/1
| ind = y
| ind_just = Note that this is the same author as source 2 from the article.
| rel = y
| rel_just = Small magazine, but presumably notable; no reason to believe otherwise.
| sig = y
| sig_just =
}}
{{ source assess
| source = Tovey, Helen. “Genealogy Gadgets & Apps for All Occasions!” Family Tree Magazine (02671131), June 2022, 32–35
| ind = ?
| ind_just =
| rel = ?
| rel_just =
| sig = ?
| sig_just = No access
}}
{{ source assess
| source = https://muse.jhu.edu/pub/88/article/722734/pdf
| ind = y
| ind_just =
| rel = y
| rel_just =
| sig = n
| sig_just = Uses WikiTree as a source
}}
{{ source assess
| source = https://muse.jhu.edu/pub/17/article/627387
| ind = y
| ind_just =
| rel = y
| rel_just =
| sig = n
| sig_just = Uses WikiTree as source of data
}}
{{ source assess
| source = https://muse.jhu.edu/pub/1/article/787987
| ind = y
| ind_just =
| rel = y
| rel_just =
| sig = n
| sig_just = No access, but completely implausible that this would have sigcov of WikiTree
}}
{{ source assess
| source = The judicial officers of the Transvaal High Court, 1877- 1881
| ind = y
| ind_just =
| rel = y
| rel_just =
| sig = n
| sig_just = No access, but implausible for SIGCOV, likely uses WikiTree as source
}}
{{ source assess
| source = https://hdl.handle.net/10520/EJC-1c0438e6c0
| ind = y
| ind_just =
| rel = y
| rel_just =
| sig = n
| sig_just =
}}
{{ source assess
| source = https://journals.co.za/doi/epdf/10.17159/sajs.2020/6363
| ind = y
| ind_just =
| rel = y
| rel_just =
| sig = n
| sig_just = Uses WikiTree as source
}}
{{ source assess
| source = https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1910&context=sahs_review
| ind = y
| ind_just =
| rel = y
| rel_just =
| sig = n
| sig_just = Passing mention
}}
{{ source assess
| source = https://www.medichub.ro/reviste-de-specialitate/orl-ro/femei-celebre-in-stomatologie-secolele-xviii-xix-id-7667-cmsid-63
| ind = y
| ind_just =
| rel = y
| rel_just =
| sig = n
| sig_just = Uses WikiTree as source
}}
}}
And here it is for the sources discussed at this AfD. My !vote is coming in soon. [[User:Actualcpscm|Actualcpscm]]<sup> [[Special:Contributions/Actualcpscm|scrutinize]], [[User talk:Actualcpscm#top|talk]]</sup> 09:28, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
:At a glance, ''[[Kings County Record]]'' is an ordinary newspaper. [[User:Gråbergs Gråa Sång|Gråbergs Gråa Sång]] ([[User talk:Gråbergs Gråa Sång|talk]]) 09:35, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
::Given that it's a newspaper of record, it's probably reliable. That gives us another GNG source. [[User:Actualcpscm|Actualcpscm]]<sup> [[Special:Contributions/Actualcpscm|scrutinize]], [[User talk:Actualcpscm#top|talk]]</sup> 09:48, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
{{ source assess table |
{{ source assess
| source = https://www.proquest.com/docview/2582803033/288919154B3E4D32PQ/1
| ind = y
| ind_just =
| rel = y
| rel_just =
| sig = y
| sig_just =
}}
{{ source assess
| source = https://www.proquest.com/docview/1021925089/D4D14316374D4B25PQ/1
| ind = y
| ind_just =
| rel = y
| rel_just =
| sig = -
| sig_just = No substantial analysis.
}}
{{ source assess
| source = https://www.proquest.com/docview/1151258320/288919154B3E4D32PQ/1
| ind = y
| ind_just =
| rel = y
| rel_just = <del>Anyone know anything about King's County Record?</del> Appears to be reliable.
| sig = y
| sig_just =
}}
{{ source assess
| source = https://www.newspapers.com/article/lancaster-farming/129612151/
| ind = y
| ind_just =
| rel = y
| rel_just =
| sig = n
| sig_just = Cites WikiTree as a source
}}
{{ source assess
| source = https://familytreemagazine.com/uncategorized/best-social-media-websites-2014/
| ind = y
| ind_just =
| rel = ?
| rel_just =
| sig = n
| sig_just =
}}
}}
*'''<ins>Weak</ins> Keep'''. This discussion is a ''mess'', and I think a lot of participants got completely sidetracked. However, the standards of [[WP:GNG]] and [[WP:NCORP]] are almost certainly met. <del>The [[WP:THREE|three best sources]] here are [https://www.google.it/books/edition/Analyzing_Digital_Discourse_and_Human_Be/9sSNCwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0 1], [https://www.proquest.com/docview/2582803033/288919154B3E4D32PQ 2], [https://www.google.it/books/edition/DNA_and_Social_Networking/MEM7AwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1 3].</del><ins>1 is about a different WikiTree. I think there's still enough here, but it's really borderline without that book.</ins> However, I think there is a ''very strong'' [[WP:NEXIST]] argument to be made. Clearly, WikiTree is used a source of data by a lot of reliably published academic papers, often without further explanation. To me, that indicates a certain renown within the academic field; if WikiTree were not considered reliable, it wouldn't be used to frequently in academic works. Renown does not establish notability, but it's a consequence of analysis (that we have not found yet). ''Someone, somewhere almost certainly analysed the reliability of WikiTree data for academic work''. I find it hard to believe that it would be so widely used if that had never happened. That gives us 3 GNG sources, plus potentially some of the ones I don't have access to, plus a high likelihood that there is academic analysis of the reliability of WikiTree that we haven't found. That's enough for [[WP:GNG]] and [[WP:NCORP]], in my opinion. [[User:Actualcpscm|Actualcpscm]]<sup> [[Special:Contributions/Actualcpscm|scrutinize]], [[User talk:Actualcpscm#top|talk]]</sup> 09:34, 18 August 2023 (UTC) Edited 09:47, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
:There's also [https://www.proquest.com/docview/1151258320/288919154B3E4D32PQ this source] re. GNG. [[User:Actualcpscm|Actualcpscm]]<sup> [[Special:Contributions/Actualcpscm|scrutinize]], [[User talk:Actualcpscm#top|talk]]</sup> 09:50, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
:On the NEXIST, I think there's an argument that such sources would have appeared by now, if they're out there ([[WP:MUSTBESOURCES]] which of course is an ''essay''). I'm not confident it's "a lot", I have no good comparison. It can indicate a certain renown, or to some extent some academic sloppiness. [[User:Gråbergs Gråa Sång|Gråbergs Gråa Sång]] ([[User talk:Gråbergs Gråa Sång|talk]]) 12:03, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
::That‘s the thing, NEXIST and MUSTBESOURCES are somewhat contradictory. I want to assume that academic use of WikiTree is based on legitimate renown rather than sloppiness, but I‘m not naïve to the point of denying that sloppiness exists in academia. It seems that someone took the time to compile a large number of academic works that use WikiTree as a source, so it is weird that they found all that and no analysis. I‘ll take another look at the GNG sources we actually have. [[User:Actualcpscm|Actualcpscm]]<sup> [[Special:Contributions/Actualcpscm|scrutinize]], [[User talk:Actualcpscm#top|talk]]</sup> 12:58, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
:::Looks like there‘s still enough. We‘re back to [[WP:THREE]] with the Kings County Record piece. None of those sources are particularly convincing to me, but all of them technically fulfill the requirements. [[User:Actualcpscm|Actualcpscm]]<sup> [[Special:Contributions/Actualcpscm|scrutinize]], [[User talk:Actualcpscm#top|talk]]</sup> 14:20, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
::::[[User:Actualcpscm|Actualcpscm]], I can't find where anyone verified that the Kings County Record piece was a news report, rather than an event announcement or similar? Sorry if I missed it. [[User:MundoMango|MundoMango]] ([[User talk:MundoMango|talk]]) 14:38, 18 August 2023 (UTC) (former member and frequent critic of WikiTree management)
:::::If you meet the requirements, you can access it through the Wikipedia Library. It is a brief report on WikiTree, not an event announcement or press release. It's attributed to Diane Lynn Tibert McGyver (labelled a freelance writer), who doesn't seem to have a direct connection to WikiTree. [[User:Actualcpscm|Actualcpscm]]<sup> [[Special:Contributions/Actualcpscm|scrutinize]], [[User talk:Actualcpscm#top|talk]]</sup> 14:43, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
:Update on this assessment: There are currently 3 GNG sources (see table), as well as two partials (low depth of coverage). Still looks enough to me even without the NEXIST argument. [[User:Actualcpscm|Actualcpscm]]<sup> [[Special:Contributions/Actualcpscm|scrutinize]], [[User talk:Actualcpscm#top|talk]]</sup> 14:57, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
::Regarding ''Legitimacy and the Transfer of Children'', I would argue that WikiTree was simply a research tool, like the computer the author used. She mentions the WikiTree mission; signing up for an account; not being able to enter both an adoptive family and a biological family (without creating a separate identity for herself), and uses several paragraphs to describe the disappointment, concluding with "We are not fully part of either family, and thus, our sense of belonging is always contingent and negotiated"; later she mentions, but provides no detail about her experience (if any), with the "Adoption Angels." WikiTree was used mainly as an example of how genealogical websites work.
::- (Full disclosure: I am a WikiTree excommunicant. I wouldn't presume to vote in this discussion.) [[Special:Contributions/2600:1010:B121:DC53:50F:7866:448C:37DA|2600:1010:B121:DC53:50F:7866:448C:37DA]] ([[User talk:2600:1010:B121:DC53:50F:7866:448C:37DA|talk]]) 19:23, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
{{clear}}
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.''<!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>
| |||