Draft talk:Doug Gilding
Add topic | This draft does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Did you know nomination
[edit]A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
[edit]The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:22, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
Response to your Talk page question
[edit]~2026-34066-75, Responding to your question at your Talk page: For starters, look at Wikipedia:Notability (people), and in particular, WP:CRIME as it applies to perpetrators. Note that WP:BLP1E applies, but "[having] a large role within a well-documented historic event" probably does not. Furthermore, the question of "wrongfully convicted" has not been decided. That says to me that this content may be better placed in an article about a larger topic; perhaps Felony murder rule (Florida). Currently no article exists for that topic (that blue link is a redirect), and the topic is almost without question notable. So one option would be to redirect your efforts toward writing an article on that topic, where a summary of the content in this Draft could be included. The other option is to carry on with this Draft, and try to demonstrate Notability.
To see if the topic of this Draft meets the WP:GNG, I went through the citations in rev. 1360152782 of 15:45, 19 June 2026. I didn't check all 28 of them, as I rejected three YouTube refs (one might be reliable anyway, as it is from NBC News, but print is preferable), and six WP:PRIMARY sources (four inmate pop.; two court docs). I tossed out seven refs as having no coverage of Gilding at all (#16 Grodin-2019, #17 Grodin-2014, #19 Tedesco-2021, #20 Farrell-2025, #24 Ouzts-2016, #25 Liptak-2007, #27 Wallace-2015). I discounted three refs as having some coverage, but not contributing toward Notability: ref #4 (Gilding-2022) is non-independent (written by Gilding); #5 (McGivern-2022) mentions him just once in passing; #6 ("Making An Exoneree"-2025) has an 88-word blurb about a film; it does not count as SIGCOV. I skipped checking the Orlando Sentinel articles as there were eight of them (#2, 7, 8, 9, 11, 21, 22, 23), and they are probably your best bet in meeting SIGCOV, assuming they are independent of each other and cover the topic in detail. Mathglot (talk) 04:19, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
- Hi Mathglot! Thamk you so much for taking the time to look over the page! There is so much to the whole wiki-page editing deal...phew! I've had to go read each of the guidelines to see what they are. The self-published and Youtube guidelines seem to have exceptions that may apply to someone incarcerated, who has social media and youtube run by a university professor about him (who might be considered an expert in the field)...it's all so confusing. Perhaps you're right that Gilding's case is not notable; although Ryan Holle's was, as well as Jennifer Mee's, who have had wiki pages about them for years, so I figured Gilding's case was at least as notable. Plus, his advocacy efforts and writing legislation seem notable. But it's so hard to tell, since there are very diverse views here on wiki, and one editor will give me advice I try to follow, only to find out the page may not even be notable. Ho hum...so discouraging. But thank you for your input, and I'll keep chugging along! Maybe a Florida felony murder page is a good idea...but in PLACE of pages like Ryan Holle, Jennifer Mee, and Doug Gilding, or in ADDITION to them...dunno. But I'll keep researching. Thank you again Mathglot for your time and comments! The wikipedia community is awesome! - Nikki ;-))) ~2026-34066-75 (talk) 15:17, 20 June 2026 (UTC)