Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Arts and entertainment

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WikiProject Biography
General information
Announcements
Departments
Work groups and subprojects
Things you can do
Biography article statistics
Arts and Entertainment Work Group

The Arts and Entertainment Work Group is a working group of members of the Biography WikiProject dedicated to ensuring quality and coverage of biography articles.

Biography (arts and entertainment) articles by quality and importance
Quality Importance
Top High Mid Low NA ??? Total
FA 8 17 40 81 146
FL 3 3 6
A 1 1 1 3
GA 10 37 84 401 64 596
B 50 146 401 1,188 2,854 4,639
C 19 168 753 6,763 2 15,173 22,878
Start 4 95 1,172 24,560 12 57,519 83,362
Stub 1 17 381 31,670 7 45,640 77,716
List 4 4 169 1 165 343
Category 7 11,347 11,354
Disambig 1 28 29
File 355 355
Project 7 7
Redirect 413 1,433 1,846
Template 2 869 871
NA 19 17 36
Other 1 26 56 83
Assessed 92 485 2,840 65,304 14,134 121,415 204,270
Unassessed 2 98 1,089 1,189
Total 92 485 2,842 65,402 14,134 122,504 205,459
WikiWork factors (?) ω = 989,701 Ω = 5.23


Related Projects

Since biographies are potentially under the purview of almost all WikiProjects, it is important that we work in tandem with these projects. Also, when seeking collaboration on articles, don't neglect to approach WikiProjects that are part of the geographical region your subject is/was in.

Related Portals

Increase the exposure of our work group by nominating our articles for their Portal FA and DYKs... Specific discipline portals are listed in that section.

Navigation
Articles
Announcements/To Do (edit)
  • Notability questioned:
  • FAC:
  • FAR:
    • none •
  • FARC:
    • none •
  • GA Noms:
  • Review:
    • none •
  • Article requests::
  • John_Buscema: There's a debate between the current version and this version - http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Buscema&oldid=181851662 - requesting input to arrive at a consensus integrating both versions.
  • Pierce O'Donnell — California's 22nd congressional district candidate[1] Los Angeles lawyer Buchwald v. Paramount screenwriter [2] author ISBN 1-56584-958-2 ISBN 0-385-41686-5 [3] California Fair Political Practices Commission[4][5][6][7]
  • William Ely Hill (1887-1962) - Illustrator, created artwork for the book covers for F. Scott Fitzgerald and had a regular entry in the New York tribune along with being published on numerous occasions.
  • Misc:

Add this to-do list to your User page! {{Wikipedia:WikiProject_Biography/Arts and entertainment/Announcements}}

Directions for expanding any division below

[edit]

The general outline and collection has been started, but if you would like to expand and organize a discipline, here's what you do. Right below the page heading for the discipline insert this: {{subst:Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Work groups/Division banner}} and save. This will put a rough outline together for you and then you can edit it to conform to your area. See Writers and critics below for an example. If your project grows large enough where it's taking up a good portion of this page, you should probably move it to a subpage of this page.

You might also want to make a Members section for people to join your specific area!

Tagging articles

[edit]

Any article related to this work group should be marked by adding |a&e-work-group=yes to the {{WPBiography}} project banner at the top of its talk page. This will automatically place it into Category:Arts and entertainment work group articles. Articles can be assessed for priority within this work group by using the |a&e-priority= parameter. See Template:WikiProject Biography/doc for detailed instructions on how to use the banner.

Members

[edit]
  1. I am ready to work on the biography articles of Indian or Biography actors Jogesh 69 (talk) 15:00, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  2. come help with the Bronwen Mantel article Smith Jones 22:16, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Lovelaughterlife (talk · contribs) Worked extensively on some biographies; reverted vandalism some others
  4. Francoisalex2 (talk · contribs)
  5. Dovebyrd (talk · contribs)
  6. Artventure22 (talk · contribs)
  7. Truth in Comedy (talk · contribs)
  8. Warlordjohncarter (talk · contribs)
  9. DENAMAX (talk · contribs) Maxim Stoyalov
  10. Ozgod (talk · contribs)
  11. Eremeyv (talk · contribs)
  12. Susanlesch (talk · contribs), mostly inactive
  13. EraserGirl (talk) 03:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Shruti14 (talk · contribs) will help when I can
  15. Jubileeclipman (talk · contribs) I am interested in taking on UK celebrities with articles that are stubs or otherwise non-standard. Entirely rewrote Fearne Cotton to raise standard and remove fansite tag. I am working on Holly Willoughby which was merely a list plus trivia. Will also work on musicians, all genre, living or dead.
  16. Jarhed (talk · contribs) 21:01, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Mvzix (talk · contribs)
  18. Cassianto (talk · contribs)
  19. Iamthecheese44 (talk · contribs)
  20. Georgiasouthernlynn (talk · contribs)
  21. Fitindia (talk · contribs)
  22. BabbaQ (talk · contribs)
  23. Woodstop45 (talk · contribs)
  24. Willthacheerleader18 (talk · contribs)
  25. The Eloquent Peasant (talk · contribs)
  26. Lopifalko (talk · contribs)
  27. Terasaface (talk) 03:31, 17 January 2020 (UTC) Working on BLP of artists primarily working in the fields of Studio craft[reply]
  28. Corachow (talk · contribs)
  29. Yorubaja (talk · contribs) 14:23:20, 18 January 2021 (UTC) [reply]
  30. Ms Kabintie (talk · contribs)
  31. JamesNotin (talk · contribs)
  32. Ppt91 (talk · contribs)
  33. Slacker13 (talk · contribs)

General

[edit]

Infoboxes

[edit]

Requested articles

[edit]

Actors

[edit]

Architects

[edit]
Click on "►" below to display subcategories:
Architects

Sanwal sharma

Illustrators

[edit]
Click on "►" below to display subcategories:
Illustrators

Painters

[edit]
Click on "►" below to display subcategories:
Painters

Photographers

[edit]
Click on "►" below to display subcategories:
Photographers

Sculptors

[edit]
Click on "►" below to display subcategories:
Sculptors

Comics artists

[edit]
Click on "►" below to display subcategories:
Comics artists

Visual arts deletions

[edit]
Visual arts deletion sorting discussions
See also: Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Artists


Visual arts

[edit]

Kiosko (Hendrix)

[edit]
Kiosko (Hendrix) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails GNG. One of the 2 sources provided is a primary source. LibStar (talk) 01:37, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Amadour

[edit]
Amadour (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSINGER, WP:SIGCOV, WP:BIO. Note tag added. Present coverage all PR. Introducing Amadour, EP being released soon. scope_creepTalk 16:37, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dani Brubaker

[edit]
Dani Brubaker (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Notablity not established; article appears to be wp:promo. Her name does appear in published sources but only in captions for her photography. The one piece of writing I found about her was about winning an honorable mention on pr.com, which is just a press release, not a published article. Yuchitown (talk) 17:41, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - I saw this a few days ago while patrolling the NPP feed, and questioned the notability. She is a working commercial photographer who makes some very nice photographs, however she not a notable photographer per WP criteria for WP:NARTIST nor the general notability guideline. She lived in two houses that have been written about, and she took some controversial photographs of a young girl. The sourcing consists of her own website, some blogs or blog-like coverage mostly about the young girl, or about her two houses. Other sources include a self-published Lulu "book", and photo caption mentions. This is not the type of in-depth significant coverage needed for an encyclopedia article; she does not have the type of track record that we normally see for a notable photographer. The article seems to be WP:PROMO. Netherzone (talk) 18:26, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Source assessment table:
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?
https://www.danibrubaker.com/biography No No No photographer's own website ✘ No
https://www.remodelista.com/posts/updated-historic-casita-galisteo-new-mexico-for-sale/ No No No article about the purcase and renovation of real estate on a real estate site. ✘ No
https://thejasminebrand.com/2011/08/07/is-a-10-year-old-model-wearing-no-shirt-or-heels-too-sexy/ No No No article about Thylane Blondeau ✘ No
https://www.who.com.au/entertainment/most-beautiful-girl-in-the-world-who-is-thylane-blondeau/ ? ? No article about Thylane Blondeau ✘ No
https://www.jezebel.com/fashion-industry-salivates-over-creepy-photos-of-10-yea-5827092 Yes Yes No article about Thylane Blondeau ✘ No
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/thylane-loubry-blondeau-mother_n_919501 Yes Yes No article about Thylane Blondeau's mother ✘ No
https://anneofcarversville.com/body-politics/2011/8/3/thylane-lena-rose-blondeau-a-supermodel-in-the-making.html No No No article about Thylane Blondeau ✘ No
https://books.google.com/books?id=M1RwDwAAQBAJ ? ? No Google books listing for Britney Spears Is Coming-back! with no mention of Brubaker ✘ No
https://www.today.com/popculture/britney-her-own-best-publicist-wbna22715757 Yes Yes No article about Britney Spears' children ✘ No
https://people.com/celebrity/sag-awards-2016-celebrities-in-peoples-photo-booth/ Yes Yes No promotion of PEOPLE's Photo Booth with photo credit for Brubaker ✘ No
https://www.billboard.com/music/rb-hip-hop/ciara-new-album-baby-bump-harpers-bazaar-interview-7717081/ Yes Yes No photo credit for Brubaker ✘ No
https://www.interviewmagazine.com/photographers/dani-brubaker Yes Yes Yes portfolio for Interview magazine ✔ Yes
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.
  • Keep - Thank you for the feedback. I found the book and it's not a self-published. It appears to be someone who is inspired by her work. I have also found sources related to photos she took of Britney Spears in 2009. I have not added the sources yet as I am still reading over them as some appear to be contentious, so I am being cautious as what is sourced. I am not related in any form to the artist, so I can attest it is not a WP:PROMO as suggested. This article is within the scope of WP:VISUALARTS; WP:NEWMEXICO; along with several others. I would kindly ask you to reconsider and assist me with the page. I am new to Wiki editing, so would this better suited for WP:DRAFT?
    Coolhandluke2022 (talk) 23:40, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The Today articles are about Brubaker allegedly selling photos of Spear's children, later revealed by the same source, Article on Today.comSpears sold the photos herself during her public meltdown. The article is about Brubaker. Coolhandluke2022 (talk) 12:51, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Lulu.com book is self published by the person who wrote it - Lulu is a self-publishing platform, not a reliable publishing house. Netherzone (talk) 23:45, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Understood. Thank you for clarifying. Coolhandluke2022 (talk) 01:40, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: The PR.com article seems to be all there is; I don't find anything else. Not listed in the Getty ULAN [8], so delete for a lack of sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 00:23, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK to delete for now, but concur with earlier post that Dani Brubaker's biggest claim to fame in terms of secondary coverage is related to photographs she took of Britney Spears in 2007. At first, it was rumored that Dani had put the photos up for sale against Britney's wishes as explained in this article on Today.com, but a later article in the same publication, "Britney is her own best publicist", claimed that Britney herself had been behind the sale of the "beautiful" photographs all along. In the end, it seems like a non-story and hardly seems like the main thing Dani Brubaker would want to be known for (particularly since along the way, it was suggested that Britney was planning to file a lawsuit against her). A further point is that it's not just photo credits; Brubaker also appears to have written at least one article in 2018 for Marie Claire. She is also mentioned in passing in this article, "Kids' Photography, Coming of Age" in Photo District News. All in all, it's just not quite enough to satisfy Wikipedia criteria for notability at this time. That said, given her strong portfolio as a celebrity photographer, it would not be surprising if Dani Brubaker does receive coverage about her life and work in the future; and if this coverage is in independent, reliable secondary sources (please see WP:RELIABLESOURCES), it would help satisfy the Wikipedia criteria for notability (please see WP:GNG). (And if #TeamDani is reading this, worth having a read of WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY as well.) Cielquiparle (talk) 03:22, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Instead of deleting would you consider WP:NOTJUSTYET Coolhandluke2022 (talk) 12:56, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If you follow that link, it goes to Wikipedia:Too soon. Please read it. Such articles are deleted, but if/when the subject becomes more notable in real life a new article could be created in the future. As Cielquiparle recommends, please read WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY. All these links explain Wikipedia's policies. Yuchitown (talk) 13:59, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Coolhandluke2022, I've twice now had to move your comments because they either split another editors comment, or because it was threaded incorrectly. Please be mindful of this in the future. Thanks, Netherzone (talk) 19:48, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Robinson (paperfolder)

[edit]
Nick Robinson (paperfolder) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No reliable secondary sources. External links section points to a couple interviews, but just interviews can’t uphold an entire article. This deletion discussion is alongside Typhoon Saturday. This page was created by an IP address (IP is coincidentally is in the same place Nick Robinson is from), and was later edited by accounts named "Iamnickrobinson" and "Robinnick" a.k.a the most obvious WP:COI violation of the decade. Roasted (talk) 16:32, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There is a review of his solo album by Jazz Journal. toweli (talk) 08:01, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prue Bishop

[edit]
Prue Bishop (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This semi-promotional biography of an artist who trademarked her technique for, "sculptural watercolors" does not seem to meet notability requirements for WP:GNG nor for WP:NARTIST. She did not invent sculptural watercolor, she only trademarked her own specific method. An online WP:BEFORE search only found primary sources, many links to her own website, a couple Wordpress blogs, social media and links to a few things she has written. Thinking she might qualify as a scholar/academic, I searched for her h-index on Google Scholar and Scopus (zero); she has written a few articles on the artist JMW Turner, but they don't seem to be cited frequently enough to meet ACADEMIC. The current article sourcing is either primary, or unverifiable (other than her own website and her trademark). Unfortunately, as much as I dislike seeing articles on women artists deleted, I'm bringing it here for the community to decide the outcome. Netherzone (talk) 15:49, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ulla West

[edit]
Ulla West (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Swedish article is also unreferenced. Fails WP:BIO. Only first hit of google news is about her. LibStar (talk) 06:25, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 07:05, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, with the addition of two in-depth sources by @Julle I believe this article meets WP:GNG/WP:NBIO. AlexandraAVX (talk) 17:39, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep in agreement with AlexandraAVX --ProudWatermelon (talk) 00:30, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I've spent some time hunting down sources and like AlexandraAVX, I think the article meets our minimum requirements. Google News does, for some reason, barely index Swedish newspaper articles; to make it additionally complicated to find them, many slighlty older Swedish newspaper articles aren't easily available online. But a Swedish newspaper archive yielded better results. /Julle (talk) 08:57, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per source improvement. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:34, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zoë Paul

[edit]
Zoë Paul (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:ARTIST. No awards or recognition. Created by a single purpose editor so possible promo. Sources provided merely confirm where she has exhibited and not SIGCOV. This source seems to be the only indepth coverage. LibStar (talk) 05:54, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CaptainAngus (talk) 23:20, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Please review article improvements.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:40, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Visual arts - Proposed deletions

[edit]

Visual arts - Images for Deletion

[edit]

Visual arts - Deletion Review

[edit]

Performing arts

[edit]

Comedians

[edit]
Click on "►" below to display subcategories:
Comedians

Dancers

[edit]
Click on "►" below to display subcategories:
Dancers

Directors

[edit]

Musicians

[edit]

Magicians

[edit]

Writers and critics

[edit]
Arts and Entertainment Work Group - Writers and critics

The Arts and Entertainment Work Group - Writers and critics is a working group of members of the Biography WikiProject dedicated to ensuring quality and coverage of biography articles.

Related Projects

Since biographies are potentially under the purview of almost all WikiProjects, it is important that we work in tandem with these projects. Also, when seeking collaboration on articles, don't neglect to approach WikiProjects that are part of the geographical region your subject is/was in.

Related Portals

Increase the exposure of our work group by nominating our articles for their Portal FA and DYKs. Of course, don't forget the main portal, Portal:Arts

FAs and GAs
Announcements/To do (edit)

Members

[edit]

Categories

[edit]
Click on "►" below to display subcategories:
Writers

Comics writers

[edit]
Click on "►" below to display subcategories:
Comics writers

Romance authors

[edit]

Lists

[edit]

Poets

[edit]
Click on "►" below to display subcategories:
Poets

Stubs

[edit]

Authors / Writers deletions

[edit]
Authors / Writers deletion sorting discussions


Authors

[edit]

Christiane Wolf

[edit]
Christiane Wolf (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

She's evidently done commendable work, such as the VA program, but I can't find significant coverage of her, or reviews of her books in reliable sources, to meet WP:NAUTHOR, WP:BIO or WP:GNG. She's also worked with some notable people, but on Wikipedia notability is not inherited. Wikishovel (talk) 18:14, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zaza Bibilashvili

[edit]
Zaza Bibilashvili (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Although references have been added since draftification, this is a disputed draftification. I am mindful that AfD is not cleanup. This mantra is used often during AfDs where poorly written and/or referenced articles appear here, yet AfD often triggers such a cleanup. Seee WP:HEY. Normally I would have sent this back to Draft space, but WP:DRAFTIFY prohibits this under these circumstances. I would have done so because the subject appears notable, though this requires in depth checking. But I have to do this here. My nomination is to draftify which a piece of firm advice to the creating editor to request a review from an uninvolved editor, probably an AFC reviewer (noting that AFC is not compulsory) before it is moved again to mainspace. This nomination is made to give them a relaxed environment to make the necessary edits, rather than rushing against the seven day AfD deadline. I mentioned WP:HEY before. editors feeling this has happened should ping me, and, if I agree, I will withdraw the nomination, which, under certain restricted circumstances, will be able to be closed to keep the article. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 13:49, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am author of article. Would be grateful if concrete grounds for deletion will be explained . I understand that some references are leaading to websites related to person about whom article is, but in these cases there are simply no other sources to reference and I tryed to add as many reference as possible. Please tak into account size of Georgian web, which is small and we have not too many internet sources to rely on. Thank you. Ggotua (talk) 14:10, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ggotua Please note that I have asked for the article's return to Draft: space, believing it to be premature for it to be in mainspace. Your work is incomplete, references are malformed, the article suffers from external links in the body of the article.
Moving back to Daft space will give you the time to perform improvement tasks in peace and quiet.
To be clear, I am not of the opinion so far that this should face deletion. Other people coming here may disagree. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 14:31, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Steve Tappin

[edit]
Steve Tappin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The subject appears to be a non-notable individual, lacking significant coverage in reliable sources that establish notability. Most of the sources cited in the article and on the talk page are passing mentions, interviews, primary, routine coverage, or hearsay, none of which provide in-depth coverage. The article fails to meet WP:GNG, WP:NBIO, and WP:NAUTHOR. Additionally, off-wiki evidence suggests potential undisclosed paid editing and sockpuppetry. GSS 💬 13:55, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

David Shawn Klein

[edit]
David Shawn Klein (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is an author of three books and many short stories, but I can't find evidence that any of the books passes WP:NBOOK, with at most one RS review each. (Kirkus for And The Dead Shall Live and Sherlock Mendelson; I'm not sure about IndieReader but it's the best we get for The Money). The best claim to notability via awards appears to be two nominations (not wins) for the Pushcart Prize for two short stories. I don't think this is sufficient for WP:NAUTHOR and I haven't been able to find better sourcing for WP:NBIO. ~ L 🌸 (talk) 05:57, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Neil Root

[edit]
Neil Root (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Despite having nine books to his name, I can't find evidence that any of them pass WP:NBOOK, and thus I don't think this is a pass of WP:NAUTHOR. I checked Kirkus, Booklist, and Publishers Weekly, plus some general searches for his name and some book titles, and only found four total reviews (one each for four books). I didn't find biographical coverage for WP:NBIO either. ~ L 🌸 (talk) 06:33, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Darryl Cooper

[edit]
Darryl Cooper (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article was just created on 3 September 2024, and only because of his appearance with Tucker Carlson where he said some controversial stuff. This is a WP:BLP1E - person otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual. WP:NOTNEWS also applies here, most newsworthy events do not qualify for inclusion. And editors trying to REFBOMB the lead with subpar sources to describe him as a Nazi apologist is not encouraging either. Isaidnoway (talk) 04:01, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just curious, is it Huffpo, Haaretz, or TNR that you think is a subpar source? Googleguy007 (talk) 05:07, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Xegma, we are more interested in what the sources say than in your opinion of the subject as a person. Liz Read! Talk! 06:34, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All three. None of those three sources directly and explicitly state that Cooper is a "Nazi apologist". Please see WP:HEADLINES - News headlines are not a reliable source. So since they fail to verify a contentious claim about a BLP, that makes them subpar. Those eight citations in the lead sentence are a classic example of WP:REFBOMB. For a BLP, Wikipedia prefers high-quality sources that actually verify the content. Isaidnoway (talk) 11:23, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Haaretz? You're using a clear biased source on the subject. Watch the interview - nothing you have written is even remotely true. It's just more ADL nonsense against someone who is merely questioning the narrative. ArmenianSniper (talk) 11:53, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What's "ADL nonsense"? AusLondonder (talk) 14:40, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I still disagree, but I apologize for the immature and unprofessional way I acted in the above comment, I should have been better than that Googleguy007 (talk) 12:30, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"And editors trying to REFBOMB the lead with subpar sources to describe him as a Nazi apologist is not encouraging either."
Indeed, sir. ArmenianSniper (talk) 11:54, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you believe the views that Cooper has expressed regarding the Holocaust and Hitler are "truths" you shouldn't be editing an encyclopaedia. See WP:NONAZIS. AusLondonder (talk) 14:05, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep What are the "sub-par sources"? See WP:RSPADL. I think most people with tens of thousands of paying Substack subscribers (purple check) and an extremely popular podcast are notable. GordonGlottal (talk) 15:11, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I wasn't referring to the ADL. When I nominated the article there were eight citations in the lead sentence that I considered sub-par, they have since been removed. And people with tens of thousands of paying Substack subscribers (purple check) and an extremely popular podcast are notable, only if they meet the criteria outlined in our policies and guidelines for notability. Isaidnoway (talk) 15:36, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    OK so irrelevant now. I know that editors have discussed standing up special notability guidelines for journalists/writers/etc. as we have for academics and some other groups, but I don't think that's actually happened yet. GordonGlottal (talk) 23:48, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding "notable for one event" and "low profile individual":
I can see the argument for item 1 (Reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event) or taking issue with the sources in general, but there's really no justification for deletion considering "each of three conditions" have not been met by a mile (you really don't cover points 2 and 3 enough at all) Clearly, the warning "often misapplied in deletion discussions" applies here: "Persons who actively seek out media attention are not low-profile," and this clearly fits the bill. Suggesting otherwise suggests that perhaps your emotions or personal views are getting in the way of Wikipedia's neutrality policy. Wikipedia should include information about this person and their broad reach / cultural impact, particularly now that he's been all over the news. If available information is currently limited, this article should be flagged in some other way, not marked for deletion. Again, the phrasing of "Persons who actively seek out media attention are not low-profile, regardless of whether or not they are notable" is extremely clear, even for the average user. 24.34.221.193 (talk) 20:20, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Then perhaps you should provide some published reliable sources that have significant coverage about this person who is actively seeking out media attention to establish his notability, other than just headlines and in the news items that have been recently reported in the 24 hour news cycle. Looks like to me the news cycle has left this person in the dust and moved on to Russian disinformation. Isaidnoway (talk) 22:03, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to Tucker Carlson interview with Darryl Cooper. Cooper himself is not notable because of BLP1E, but this interview definitely seems to be notable because of the controversy it has brought Carlson and Musk. The White House has now weighed in with a denunciation. See [11]. However, it’s telling that the condemnation focuses more on Carlson "giving a microphone" to Cooper, than it does on Cooper himself. There is precedent for articles about specific interviews, see the article for Tucker Carlson's interview with Vladimir Putin. The Cooper interview has caused a similar amount of controversy, even though unlike the Putin case, the guest was someone who is not otherwise notable apart from the interview.2600:1014:B08A:AA77:E890:70AA:7E06:BEF4 (talk) 23:02, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jeremy Curl

[edit]
Jeremy Curl (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
AfDs for this article:
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lack of notability Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 02:37, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John T. Wilson (born 1861)

[edit]
John T. Wilson (born 1861) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't meet WP:GNG. Should be deleted or redirected per WP:ATD to Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 20:05, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mahmut Tolon

[edit]
Mahmut Tolon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:GNG. Kadı Message 17:15, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nafsika Antypas

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Nafsika Antypas (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to be a WP:BLP1E, making news for being the victim of a scammer/abuser. Other sources about her brand are from journals running paid promotion, e.g. vegconomist.com, or interviews (primary sources), e.g. foodnavigator-asia.com. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 16:48, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nominated for speedy, thanks. Wikishovel (talk) 18:55, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jeremy Carl

[edit]
Jeremy Carl (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lack of notability Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 12:56, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nicole Sahin

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Nicole Sahin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:SIGCOV. Refs are most business news than BLP sources. Routine coverage. No indication of significance. scope_creepTalk 07:59, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, thanks for bringing this to my attention. Do you mind if I ask for clarification about why it's been nominated for deletion? Is it because many of the references also refer to her company, rather than just her personally? I had assumed (perhaps wrongly) that because she is the founder and CEO of a global HR company which has seen rapid growth post COVID, and the founder of the industry on which its based (employer of record industry which allows companies to easily hire people all over the globe), that her notability would be inherently tied to the company's performance and notability. I'd be grateful for your clarification and guidance. Cheers, Kate. KWriteReturn (talk) 05:48, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@KWriteReturn: This is a WP:BLP and consensus that is long established states that that person is not the company. Notabilty is not inherited from any other entity and there is nothing here to indicate why this person is notable. Looking at the first seven, in fact the 14 references. These are a mix of routine company news about employment, non-bylined paid-for articles, press-releases, funding, merging, expansion and acquisition news. It is all routine news. There is no WP:SECONDARY coverage to verify per WP:V that she is notable. It states in the WP:BLP policy "Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources.". There is nothing here. Nothing. scope_creepTalk 06:01, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jay Anson

[edit]
Jay Anson (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Redirect to The Amityville Horror. I did WP:BEFORE and there are a lot of reviews of The Amityville Horror and notices about his death. I wasn't able to find anything else about him outside of those two events. I checked Archive.org and Google but nothing was jumping out at me. Since I nominated this article if anyone finds some sources please ping me so I can add them to the article and I'll withdraw the nomination. Dr vulpes (Talk) 00:52, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I found additional obituaries of Anson in the LA Times, The Times of London, and the Washington Post. I've also found a 1978 article in People magazine that goes into details of Anson's life while covering the lawsuits and questions over the book, a "Milestones" mention of Anson's death in Time magazine on 3/24/1980, a short obituary in Starburst Magazine, and the same in The American Annual: 1981. Finally and most significantly, he has a detailed entry in The Contemporary Authors New Revision Series (volume 29, 1990, page 19). I know User:Dr_vulpes said to ping if citations were found, but since the citations are unavailable without the correct subscriptions I'd be happy to add them to the article in the coming days if needed.--SouthernNights (talk) 18:06, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zahir Dakenov

[edit]
Zahir Dakenov (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:POET, WP:ANYBIO or WP:GNG. No source to establish notability. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 00:20, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Robinson (paperfolder)

[edit]
Nick Robinson (paperfolder) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No reliable secondary sources. External links section points to a couple interviews, but just interviews can’t uphold an entire article. This deletion discussion is alongside Typhoon Saturday. This page was created by an IP address (IP is coincidentally is in the same place Nick Robinson is from), and was later edited by accounts named "Iamnickrobinson" and "Robinnick" a.k.a the most obvious WP:COI violation of the decade. Roasted (talk) 16:32, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There is a review of his solo album by Jazz Journal. toweli (talk) 08:01, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Christina Rahm (scientist)

[edit]
Christina Rahm (scientist) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article doesn't show notability. fails GNG. ANTCrowd439 (talk) 06:11, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Christoph Bernhard Künzle

[edit]
Christoph Bernhard Künzle (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Per https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAuth/Strangers_Eyes, creator is globally blocked as "Spam-only account: probable coordinated undisclosed paid editing." Snowman304|talk 19:04, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This Wikipedia article appears to have been created by a dubious source. I have added significant factual corrections and citations to improve this article. ChrisK5566 (talk) 17:06, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have significantly edited this article for accuracy; I am the subject of this article ChrisK5566 (talk) 17:18, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

William Morton Mackay

[edit]
William Morton Mackay (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unable to verify a single fact. Fails WP:SIGCOV. I was planning to update the article to a modern standard but can't find anything. Nothing. scope_creepTalk 12:17, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Becky Paul-Enenche

[edit]
Becky Paul-Enenche (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Notability is WP:NOTINHERITED. Subject fails WP:ANYBIO, WP:NAUTHOR or WP:GNG. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 23:01, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dumitru Găleșanu

[edit]
Dumitru Găleșanu (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There is no clear evidence of notability. The subject has won three obscure prizes: that’s it. I also suspect paid editing: the article is by a new account, with links to google.pk. I would imagine that someone from Pakistan whose very first article is about a random Romanian poet was paid to publish. Biruitorul Talk 13:01, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:09, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yogacharya Govindan Nair

[edit]
Yogacharya Govindan Nair (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I don’t see any sources in English to support WP:AUTHOR. The subject has written multiple books but I see no in-depth reviews, just online bookshops and Wikipedia mirrors. Mccapra (talk) 05:40, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Twenty Seventh Edition of his book was released on the International day by the publisher who published his book nearly 4 decades ago. here is the link https://www.instagram.com/dcbooks/p/C8eOMOMyNxz/?hl=en&img_index=1 2405:201:E010:706F:F0B9:15A2:5E91:AA5B (talk) 13:13, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. No sources on the page. Fails WP:NBIO. Fails WP:NAUTHOR, who is not widely cited by peers or successors. As Author and Yoga instructor, subject has not created a significant or well-known work and I cannot find subject's work in multiple independent periodical articles or reviews, or of an independent and notable work. Fails WP:GNG too. RangersRus (talk) 13:45, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. The article creator objects to deletion (see User talk:Versatilegeek#Nomination of Yogacharya Govindan Nair for deletion) so I don't think Soft Deletion is an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:40, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are sources for the article and there is no ground for deleting this page. Lack of contribution does not necessitate deletion of a page. Such a practice will only contribute to removal of information about the lesser known people. I strongly oppose the deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Versatilegeek (talk • contribs) 07:14, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment to the objection that “there are sources” my response as nominator is that I don’t doubt that the subject is the author of multiple books. What there is not is anything that demonstrates notability. We don’t allow bio articles sourced almost entirely to online shopping sites with dead links. In addition not a single detail of the subject’s life is even verifiable based on the refs in the article or anything else I can find in English. I don’t think it’s acceptable to retain an entirely unverified bio on the strength of a claim that “there are sources.” Mccapra (talk) 06:11, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As you say, sources don’t have to be in English. They can be in any language but if they exist this discussion is the place to share them. Mccapra (talk) 20:31, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zoe Gardner (migration expert)

[edit]
Zoe Gardner (migration expert) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

All edits are by this obvious agency - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Starklinson

This amounts to a self-written autobiography of an opinion columnist. It does not warrant a wikipedia article and the current one is promotional — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ieusuiarnaut (talk • contribs) 16:03, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

— Ieusuiarnaut (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

  • Delete - as above, clearly promotional content relating to a non-notable person. Furthermore, use of “expert” in disambiguation in article title clearly biased and inappropriate. Elshad (talk) 19:57, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - very clear cut case of a non-notable person. Badharlick (talk) 23:43, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Agreed, this should be on LinkdIn, not a supposed encylopædia. It’s essentially an advert for a self declared “expert” fishing for media appearances. 141.195.160.217 (talk) 00:52, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The article was only created in August 2023, her media appearances long predate that - this[18] is from 2015. I think it's important that media pundits have articles, it enables everyone to easily look at their credentials and assess their motivations. Orange sticker (talk) 10:06, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I disagree, Wikipedia policy does not care about your opinions on how you think the world ought to be. Badharlick (talk) 05:12, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Clearly not autobiographical as has been alleged - the creating editor, @Starklinson:, although they have chosen to remain as a redlinked editor without a userpage, has created and edited a wide range of articles over seven years (in contrast to the nominator of this AfD who appears to be proposing this AfD as their first edit). Appears to be a notable expert in the field, cited in many sources. The disambiguation, needed to distinguish her from Z G (actress), could perhaps be "(migration specialist)" to avoid any perceived subjectivity in "expert", so perhaps Keep and move. PamD 08:33, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Agree with all this including altering the title.Orange sticker (talk) 10:49, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @PamD, I'm thinking this discussion could end up as being a no consensus outcome. What do you feel about (refugee advocate) as the disambiguation? TarnishedPathtalk 12:03, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @TarnishedPath Not sure about "advocate". She describes herself on LinkedIn as "migration policy specialist". I think I'd still go with "(migration specialist)", which covers a wider range of activity than "advocate" but avoids the possible puffery of "expert". The category Category:Experts on refugees, which was created in 2015, is slightly odd, with no parent category in a "people by occupation" tree. It's difficult to find a descriptor which fits someone employed in a field, rather than various "activists" categories or disambiguators. PamD 18:03, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is no evidence she is a migration 'specialist' or expert. This appears to be a confusion of one sided activism with actual non-partisan knowledge. Working for a pro-immigration ngo for asylum seekers is hardly expertise and this characterisation favours open border policy which is contentious in the public realm. Must be deleted and replaced with something like 'activist' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A10:D582:D18:0:AC59:B40E:AD1E:937B (talk) 09:31, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Women, Politics, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:33, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep surprised to see this as I recognised the name immediately, has appeared regularly on news programmes and is referred to as an expert as references and news search show. Orange sticker (talk)
  • Delete: Per WP:NOTRESUME. TarnishedPathtalk 10:51, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I noticed how this was nominated by, and many of the votes are by, new users who have made no other contributions to the project so searched Twitter and it seems the subject of this article made a tweet yesterday that received a lot of attention and then Twitter users brought attention to her Wikipedia page. I've looked to see if there is an appropriate template to flag this AfD but can't find one, but it seems to be this has been nominated in bad faith Orange sticker (talk) 11:12, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's interesting that we don't allow a brand-new editor to create an article in mainspace, but we do allow them to create an AfD. Perhaps this should be reconsidered? PamD 11:43, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @PamD and @Orange sticker, I've added a {{notavote}} notice. However, I must note that the first and third editors to !vote delete after nomination are editors who have been on Wikipedia 19 years and 9 years respectively, so while there are some IPs voting and the article was nominated by a very new user, I don't think it's completely accurate to state that many of the votes are by new users. TarnishedPathtalk 12:35, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @TarnishedPath Yes but: did you see the editing history of the 19-year editor? 4 edits since 2019, of which one to their user page, one to their talk page. Not a very active editor. The 9-year editor does seem to be a regular contributor on a range of topics. PamD 13:07, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    While I do agree that it's highly unusual when a day old account makes such a nomination and then is followed by some IPs participating, I really don't think that's enough to make judgments about longstanding editors regardless of their recent history. TarnishedPathtalk 13:12, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think rather than back or forth about who is editing perhaps engaging with the substance here would be preferable - to qualify as an ‘expert’, you would presumably need well read academic publications and so on. Every Think Tank employee in the U.K. doesn’t have a Wikipedia page, even if they are occasionally cited in the press. The subject has no published books, academic papers, etc; this is clearly below the threshold of noteworthy-ness. Plus the article is promotional in tone and I strongly suspect some connection, financial or otherwise, between the main editor and the subject 2A01:CB06:B852:BE75:69B1:C245:F364:C83B (talk) 08:34, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Activity level is not a requirement for a users vote to be considered legitimate. I find your arguments in this discussion to be highly suspect in their motivation, as you appear to be attempting to undermine the legitimacy of the vote rather than participating in the actual discussion. Badharlick (talk) 05:10, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It is extremely bad etiquette to assume bad faith as you are. Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit, provided they follow the rules set out in the policy. It does not exist for cabals of users to gatekeep others from contributing. Badharlick (talk) 05:05, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Thank you, @PamD:. I only put (migration expert) because I didn't know what else to call her - that's how she's often referred to by the British press. I don't think 'expert' is necessarily biased, it just means she's done significant research on the topic. And I don't think 'activist' quite fits. However, if anyone has a better idea for the title, I'd be open to that. – Starklinson 13:13 UTC
    • ALSO, Wikipedia has a category Category:Experts on refugees, suggesting the language of 'expert' is not considered too partial for Wikipedia. I would also like to make it very clear that I have never received payment for my work on Wikipedia, nor have I ever made a page for someone as a favour. I know none of these people personally. – Starklinson 21:43 UTC
  • Delete: Appears in various media as a subject expert, but I don't find much coverage about this person. Source 2 is a "30 under 30 list" in a PR item. The BBC sources is an interview where she talks about things. Source 14 is ok-ish. Oaktree b (talk) 16:32, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    What about source 1? Starklinson (talk) 12:28, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's an interview with/about her, not terrible but not nearly enough. Generally don't count for RS as they are primary. Oaktree b (talk) 15:55, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Regardless of the provenance of this article, the subject fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. Awards are WP:MILL (a trade pub's 30 under 30), and the rest of the sources are WP:INTERVIEWS (which do not contribute to notability), WP:ROUTINE coverage of organizations she works for and WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS. No obvious redirect. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:42, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Strongly agree with this. Badharlick (talk) 05:13, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Could draftify be an option? – Starklinson 13:30, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Starklinson, draftification is generally for newish articles, not for ones which have already been around for a year and haven't demonstrated that they meet our notability guidelines in that time. See WP:DRAFTNO. TarnishedPathtalk 06:28, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Per Oaktree b and Dclemens1971. It also does read somewhat like a resume. Flyingfishee (talk) 04:07, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. As PamD explains, the accusation of autobiography doesn't hold water. And while some of the sources are interviews or trivial, there are multiple sources that are prose (not interviews) and that focus on Gardner as a person (are not trivial). Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 11:25, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Neither of those articles constitute WP:SIGCOV. They are WP:ROUTINE coverage of her in her capacity as an employee of her organization. The National article in particular is primarily composed of her quotations. The only material we could extract on her encyclopedically is that she worked for the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:27, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: While it is difficult to imagine that consensus will be achieved on this one, there is clearly enough interest in this discussion to give it another try.

Note: Important procedural issues have been raised here, such as Pam's observation about allowing new editors to create AfDs but not articles in mainspace. That may need to be discussed elsewhere.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 19:02, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 03:54, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel B. Cid

[edit]
Daniel B. Cid (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not enough in-depth references for a WP:BIO, suggest redirecting the article to his notable creation OSSEC. Already done that, but was reverted. PhotographyEdits (talk) 10:36, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:21, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:29, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Authors proposed deletions

[edit]

Tools

[edit]
Main tool page: toolserver.org
Article alerts are available, updated by AAlertBot. More information...
  • Reflinks - Edits bare references - adds title/dates etc. to bare references
  • Checklinks - Edit and repair external links
  • Dab solver - Quickly resolve ambiguous links.
  • Peer reviewer - Provides hints and suggestion to improving articles.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Biography/Arts_and_entertainment&oldid=1189455945#Writers_and_critics"