280:
270:
252:
148:
123:
92:
210:
134:
21:
598:
being absurd, I realize) and showed you the award, that wouldn't be good enough because it would be an original presentation of something that is a fact. But, because you can't find "secondary" research to back it up, you would still attach the silly dispute to this article. You should be ashamed. Very sloppy and lack any professional standards.
158:
560:
This is comical. I've known him all of his life. We grew up together in
Halifax. Dartmouth??? Clearly this Tchaliburton is free styling with the facts. Did anyone attempt to contact him??? Wouldn't that be the only way to verify things, as opposed to relying on crap you're simply googling from shakey
597:
What a joke. "Not original research?" Instead you use secondary garbage that's incorrect? What else should one expect from a crew that apparently trolls online all day inserting incorrect information. So just as an example: he has the G award in his office - I've seen it. So if he came to you (I'm
443:
It's possible that the CTV bio and the Metro news article are incorrect. It's also possible that the database is incorrect. That's why we need other sources. I don't think it's fair to call a news piece from a reliable third party a "promotional blurb" however. And your claim that it was "almost
386:
That news "story" — which is actually just a promotional blurb for a bookstore reading — was almost certainly written directly based on a marketing press release for the book and/or his CTV bio, rather than any actual independent verification of facts by any staff member of
473:
explanation is that
Hollingsworth was the host of the segment in question, but the ACCT gives the award to the producers rather than to every single person who had any involvement at all and CTV is fuzzifying the distinction for public relations purposes.
494:
Stating that "further research is needed to figure out the discrepancy" raises the question as to what kind of research can be done to provide a definitive answer as to whether
Hollingsworth did or didn't win the award. If one doesn't trust the
523:
Attention
Tchaliburton: 1. He did not grow up in Dartmouth. He's from HFX and attended p-9 school at Oxford St school and high school at St. Pats. Also, he left CTV three years ago. There is no longer a link to his CTV bio.
630:
instead of
Halifax. As ridiculous as that may sound to you, that exact sort of thing — "he didn't go to the University of Toronto, he went to Stanford!", "she's not from Montana, she's from South Carolina!", etc. — really
465:— it's not a substantive article about Hollingsworth or the book, but just an announcement of an event. And while it's certainly within the realm of possibilities that the ACCT database contains errors, the balance of
499:, which gave the Gemini Awards, to list its own award winners correctly, who can one trust to list the award winners correctly? What would be a more authoritative source that we could use to resolve the question? --
133:
457:
fair to call the piece a "promotional blurb", because if you look at the actual form, content and length of the piece in question, a "promotional blurb" advertising a book launch party
651:
which person was telling the truth and which person was lying. Which is also why the fact that you claim to have personally seen his Gemini Award doesn't count for beans either —
71:
747:
706:
31:
762:
326:
403:
that aren't supported by a source — in this instance, "original research" would be happening if you used the discrepancy as "referencing" to add a section to
737:
511:
Can we find any secondary sources that say who did win that year? That would help clarify whether there's an error with the database or with the news story.
76:
332:
59:) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or
660:
496:
415:
767:
757:
752:
176:
51:
742:
531:
302:
180:
391:
itself. The thing is, you asserted more than once in the AFD discussion that checking the ACCT database of its award winners would be
184:
605:
568:
175:, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Knowledge's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
355:
293:
257:
171:
128:
103:
27:
705:. There was a discussion about whether he could legitimately be entitled to claim credit for a Gemini Award at
535:
503:
362:
371:
702:
218:
60:
609:
572:
91:
404:
109:
683:
has seen the award for themselves. Furthermore, if you know him personally then you need to read our
601:
564:
527:
70:. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to
20:
500:
359:
301:
on
Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
74:.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see
469:
between that and "CTV's promotional department is massaging the facts" is not 50-50. By far the
444:
certainly written directly based on a marketing press release" is pure conjecture on your part.
356:
http://www.academy.ca/CMSPages/PortalTemplate.aspx?aliaspath=/About-the-Academy/Awards-Database
692:
588:
549:
512:
479:
445:
434:
375:
285:
714:
163:
67:
421:
the accuracy of their awards database. But simply checking the ACCT database for simple
230:
222:
731:
684:
584:
688:
640:
475:
430:
392:
710:
668:
648:
396:
354:
Hollingsworth is not listed as a Gemini Award winner in the ACCT's database at
147:
122:
298:
275:
269:
251:
209:
153:
718:
696:
680:
613:
591:
576:
552:
539:
515:
506:
483:
448:
438:
378:
365:
587:. If he grew up in Halifax then there should be references to verify that.
627:
622:
And somebody else can just as easily come along to insert a claim that
548:
The claims about where he grew up need to be backed up by references.
583:
Knowledge is based on secondary sources, not original research. See
183:. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
414:
the trustworthiness of their public relations departments, or to
408:
233:. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the
85:
66:
from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially
43:
15:
374:. Further research is needed to figure out the discrepancy.
208:
701:
The claim of his Gemini award has been removed again, by
675:
sources rather than an unverifiable claim that some
297:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
707:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Paul Hollingsworth
331:This article has not yet received a rating on the
425:of who it lists as the winners of its awards is
8:
659:between what some sources say and what the
395:— but it isn't, it's just plain and simple
599:
562:
525:
370:His CTV bio says he won a Gemini, as does
246:
117:
89:
748:Automatically assessed biography articles
661:Academy of Canadian Cinema and Television
497:Academy of Canadian Cinema and Television
416:Academy of Canadian Cinema and Television
399:. "Original research" is the creation of
248:
119:
763:Unknown-importance Journalism articles
234:
7:
291:This article is within the scope of
169:This article is within the scope of
738:Biography articles of living people
647:somewhere, we would have no way to
108:It is of interest to the following
30:on 6 December 2014. The result of
14:
626:went to high school with him in
311:Knowledge:WikiProject Journalism
278:
268:
250:
156:
146:
132:
121:
90:
49:This article must adhere to the
19:
768:WikiProject Journalism articles
679:person whom we don't know from
314:Template:WikiProject Journalism
193:Knowledge:WikiProject Biography
26:This article was nominated for
758:Stub-Class Journalism articles
753:WikiProject Biography articles
196:Template:WikiProject Biography
1:
743:Stub-Class biography articles
697:23:32, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
366:05:59, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
305:and see a list of open tasks.
52:biographies of living persons
719:05:37, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
614:02:27, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
592:01:21, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
577:03:38, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
181:contribute to the discussion
553:05:02, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
540:03:59, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
516:02:00, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
507:20:09, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
484:18:40, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
449:19:27, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
439:17:25, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
379:16:20, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
64:must be removed immediately
784:
641:reliable secondary sources
333:project's importance scale
663:says, we require an even
330:
263:
216:
141:
116:
643:that have actually been
461:exactly what the piece
703:User:Octobersurprise11
405:CTV Television Network
350:Not listed as a winner
294:WikiProject Journalism
217:This article has been
213:
98:This article is rated
681:Flintabbatey Flonatin
655:given that there's a
429:"original research".
212:
172:WikiProject Biography
685:conflict of interest
635:happen on Knowledge
561:internet sources?
317:Journalism articles
219:automatically rated
229:because it uses a
214:
199:biography articles
104:content assessment
616:
604:comment added by
579:
567:comment added by
542:
530:comment added by
393:original research
347:
346:
343:
342:
339:
338:
286:Journalism portal
245:
244:
241:
240:
225:or other tool as
84:
83:
42:
41:
775:
319:
318:
315:
312:
309:
288:
283:
282:
281:
272:
265:
264:
254:
247:
236:
201:
200:
197:
194:
191:
177:join the project
166:
164:Biography portal
161:
160:
159:
150:
143:
142:
137:
136:
135:
125:
118:
101:
95:
94:
86:
72:this noticeboard
44:
23:
16:
783:
782:
778:
777:
776:
774:
773:
772:
728:
727:
532:142.177.130.125
401:interpretations
372:this news story
352:
316:
313:
310:
307:
306:
284:
279:
277:
198:
195:
192:
189:
188:
162:
157:
155:
131:
102:on Knowledge's
99:
12:
11:
5:
781:
779:
771:
770:
765:
760:
755:
750:
745:
740:
730:
729:
726:
725:
724:
723:
722:
721:
639:. But without
595:
594:
589:T.C.Haliburton
558:
557:
556:
555:
550:T.C.Haliburton
521:
520:
519:
518:
513:T.C.Haliburton
501:Metropolitan90
492:
491:
490:
489:
488:
487:
486:
446:T.C.Haliburton
376:T.C.Haliburton
360:Metropolitan90
351:
348:
345:
344:
341:
340:
337:
336:
329:
323:
322:
320:
303:the discussion
290:
289:
273:
261:
260:
255:
243:
242:
239:
238:
215:
205:
204:
202:
168:
167:
151:
139:
138:
126:
114:
113:
107:
96:
82:
81:
77:this help page
61:poorly sourced
47:
40:
39:
32:the discussion
24:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
780:
769:
766:
764:
761:
759:
756:
754:
751:
749:
746:
744:
741:
739:
736:
735:
733:
720:
716:
712:
708:
704:
700:
699:
698:
694:
690:
686:
682:
678:
674:
670:
666:
662:
658:
654:
650:
646:
642:
638:
634:
629:
625:
621:
620:
619:
618:
617:
615:
611:
607:
603:
593:
590:
586:
582:
581:
580:
578:
574:
570:
566:
554:
551:
547:
546:
545:
544:
543:
541:
537:
533:
529:
517:
514:
510:
509:
508:
505:
502:
498:
493:
485:
481:
477:
472:
468:
467:probabilities
464:
460:
456:
452:
451:
450:
447:
442:
441:
440:
436:
432:
428:
424:
420:
417:
413:
410:
406:
402:
398:
394:
390:
385:
384:
383:
382:
381:
380:
377:
373:
368:
367:
364:
361:
357:
349:
334:
328:
325:
324:
321:
304:
300:
296:
295:
287:
276:
274:
271:
267:
266:
262:
259:
256:
253:
249:
232:
231:stub template
228:
224:
220:
211:
207:
206:
203:
186:
185:documentation
182:
178:
174:
173:
165:
154:
152:
149:
145:
144:
140:
130:
127:
124:
120:
115:
111:
105:
97:
93:
88:
87:
79:
78:
73:
69:
65:
62:
58:
54:
53:
48:
46:
45:
37:
33:
29:
25:
22:
18:
17:
676:
672:
669:verification
667:standard of
664:
656:
652:
644:
637:all the time
636:
632:
623:
600:— Preceding
596:
563:— Preceding
559:
526:— Preceding
522:
470:
466:
462:
458:
454:
426:
423:confirmation
422:
418:
411:
400:
397:verification
388:
369:
353:
292:
226:
170:
110:WikiProjects
75:
63:
56:
50:
36:no consensus
35:
657:discrepancy
606:71.7.175.59
569:71.7.175.59
419:criticizing
732:Categories
653:especially
308:Journalism
299:journalism
258:Journalism
237:parameter.
227:Stub-class
100:Stub-class
677:anonymous
673:published
645:published
471:likeliest
412:analyzing
190:Biography
129:Biography
68:libellous
602:unsigned
565:unsigned
528:unsigned
28:deletion
689:Bearcat
687:rules.
628:Iqaluit
476:Bearcat
431:Bearcat
711:Meters
665:higher
649:verify
585:WP:NOR
504:(talk)
363:(talk)
235:|auto=
106:scale.
389:Metro
221:by a
715:talk
693:talk
633:does
624:they
610:talk
573:talk
536:talk
480:talk
435:talk
358:. --
179:and
34:was
671:in
453:It
427:not
409:TSN
407:or
327:???
223:bot
57:BLP
734::
717:)
709:.
695:)
612:)
575:)
538:)
482:)
463:is
459:is
455:is
437:)
713:(
691:(
608:(
571:(
534:(
478:(
433:(
335:.
187:.
112::
80:.
55:(
38:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
