Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Arts and entertainment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Crystal personal.svg WikiProject Biography
General information (edit · changes)
Announcements
Departments
Work groups and subprojects
Things you can do (edit)


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.


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)

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

Directions for expanding any division below

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

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

  1. come help with the Bronwen Mantel article Smith Jones 22:16, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
  2. Lovelaughterlife (talk · contribs) Worked extensively on some biographies; reverted vandalism some others
  3. Francoisalex2 (talk · contribs)
  4. Dovebyrd (talk · contribs)
  5. Artventure22 (talk · contribs)
  6. Truth in Comedy (talk · contribs)
  7. Warlordjohncarter (talk · contribs)
  8. DENAMAX (talk · contribs) Maxim Stoyalov
  9. Ozgod (talk · contribs)
  10. Eremeyv (talk · contribs)
  11. Susanlesch (talk · contribs), mostly inactive
  12. EraserGirl (talk) 03:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
  13. Shruti14 (talk · contribs) will help when I can
  14. 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.
  15. Jarhed (talk · contribs) 21:01, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
  16. Mvzix (talk · contribs)
  17. Cassianto (talk · contribs)
  18. Iamthecheese44 (talk · contribs)
  19. Georgiasouthernlynn (talk · contribs)
  20. Fitindia (talk · contribs)
  21. BabbaQ (talk · contribs)
  22. Woodstop45 (talk · contribs)
  23. Willthacheerleader18 (talk · contribs)

General

Infoboxes

Requested articles

Actors

Architects

Click the "►" below to see all subcategories:

Sanwal sharma

Illustrators

Click the "►" below to see all subcategories:

Painters

Click the "►" below to see all subcategories:
Painters

Photographers

Click the "►" below to see all subcategories:

Sculptors

Click the "►" below to see all subcategories:
Sculptors

Comics artists

Click the "►" below to see all subcategories:

Visual arts deletions

Visual arts deletion sorting discussions

Visual arts

Ibid Gallery

Ibid Gallery (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Ibid Gallery" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Apparently fails WP:CORP. Apart from its routine business of buying and selling artworks, the only thing it has ever done to attract news coverage seems to be the closure of its London space. I've not found any in-depth coverage that indicates why it should be considered important enough to have an article here. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:14, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 19:54, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. MT TrainDiscuss 04:30, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. MT TrainDiscuss 04:30, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Erin Hanson

Erin Hanson (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Erin Hanson" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

The article fails notability test for artists, i.e., no notable gallery purchases or exhibitions, Government purchases or notable awards. She is a popular local artist, and her exhibition has been featured in The Independent Utah, but that is the only news item that you can find. http://suindependent.com/st-george-art-museum-erin-hanson/

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 19:54, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Jovita Veronica Alvares

Jovita Veronica Alvares (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Jovita Veronica Alvares" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Vanity profile. Fails WP:ANYBIO.  M A A Z   T A L K  14:37, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 18:01, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 18:01, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 18:01, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 18:01, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 18:01, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete inadequate sourcing to establish notability.104.163.148.25 (talk) 01:50, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete another article on a non-notable Pakistani Catholic. We have an awful lot of these.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:33, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Tilt (camera)

Tilt (camera) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Tilt (camera)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

No encyclopaedic content, merely a definition of the word tilt and an assertion that it is applicable to cameras. Kevin McE (talk) 14:42, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete -- DICDEF. If someone wants to move the content to Wiktionary, fine. There are hundreds of unreferenced photography articles, a remnant of a time when the standards for new articles were lower. Rhadow (talk) 15:27, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep. It's an article about a technique rather than simply a definition of a word, so not a DICDEF. Could be expanded, I'm sure, with discussion of tilt plates, etc., and how tilt is used in cinema, for which there are several possible book sources. Could quite possibly be merged somewhere else if appropriate. --Michig (talk) 16:05, 11 February 2018 (UTC) Merging with Panning (camera) and renaming that article to Panning and tilting would seem a reasonable option. --Michig (talk) 16:15, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 19:41, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 19:41, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 19:41, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 19:41, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment There's already a large section at View_camera that covers this topic and likewise tilt–shift photography deals with tilting on small and medium format cameras. I'm not certain if this standalone article is needed as the info is covered elsewhere and this specific definition is pretty basic and really can't be expanded beyond a stub. freshacconci (✉) 19:48, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete altogether or at best Merge with Pan and tilt (camera) or similar. The subject is entirely too banal on its own. Tilters gonna tilt.104.163.148.25 (talk) 01:47, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Redirect and possibly Merge anything worthwhile into the section in View_camera, as tilt–shift photography is specifically about the use of a kind of 35mm lens.--Theredproject (talk) 02:40, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment It's worth noting, however banal it is, that tilt is probably more often used as a director's instruction to a studio or remote camera operator (e.g. "tilt up and pan left") than it is in large format photo or in reference to a tilt-shift lens.104.163.148.25 (talk) 05:22, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep Matches the corresponding article on Panning_(camera), though I'd happily see both articles merged together into Pan and tilt (camera). Pan and tilt are not minor terms or minor techniques within photography. The View camera is a very specific large format camera, so a redirect would be just lost there, whereas this term is applicable to cameras/video and film photography and tripods. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:55, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Very difficult to see the two articles as matching. Panning has relevance for shutter speed and exposure, references etymology, use in video and 3D modelling: tilt essentially says "point it up or down a bit). Possible grounds for merger, but the tilt article per se is no more than application of a definition, and by no means a match to the one on panning. Kevin McE (talk) 13:00, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep. There are reasonable arguments for a merge to Panning (camera), but I don't think that works. At one level, they're both just rotations around an axis on the camera mount. But, tilt tends to be static; tilt to some angle, and lock it there. Panning is often dynamic, where you continuously pan to follow a moving subject with the specific goal of freezing motion of the main subject and/or blurring the background. This difference is implicit in the naming of the articles; it's not Pan (camera), it's Panning (camera), with the gerund form implying an ongoing action. Merging the two into tilt and pan wouldn't be terrible, but it's not necessary. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:01, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 16:05, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Eli Wilner

Eli Wilner (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Eli Wilner" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)
  • Promotional / Conflict of interest: Article is a promotion created and edited by the artist (Eliwilner (talk · contribs)) and his friend (Tayloracosta (talk · contribs)). The former user has added promotional material to other Wikipedia articles. Article is heavily subject to conflicts of interest per WP:CONFLICT, as the artist's friend and he both created it / edited it.
  • Non-notable: Article is not linked to anywhere on Wikipedia.(WP:NOTABILITY)
  • Lack of sources: It does not have any high quality sources to show it's worthy of inclusion on Wikipedia. (WP:SOURCES)
I propose delete due to the above reasons. -- Gokunks (Speak to me) 00:37, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Jack Frost (talk) 02:07, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Jack Frost (talk) 02:07, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Jack Frost (talk) 02:07, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Jack Frost (talk) 02:07, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Jack Frost (talk) 02:07, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
  •  Comment: Just curious but how has this article been assessed by two different WikiProjects before? And simply because an author has a personal connection with the subject it doesn't mean that their past edits to the subject should be reverted, only scrutinised and then discourage future editing to the article per WP:COI. --Donald Trung (Talk) (Articles) 05:51, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete There are some sources out there, but they talk about his richness (has a multi-million dollar compound in the Hamptons), what he does on Sunday (NYT profile of his Sunday routine) and a couple others that talk about how he is also rich. Nothing much in terms of notability. Realistically, once you have covered the sentence "X owns a framing company" there is not much more to say.104.163.148.25 (talk) 07:33, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep- There is coverage of this guy see [1] [2] [3]--Rusf10 (talk) 05:42, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jdcomix (talk) 01:15, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Visual arts - Proposed deletions

Visual arts - Images for Deletion

Visual arts - Deletion Review

Performing arts

Comedians

Click the "►" below to see all subcategories:
Comedians

Dancers

Click the "►" below to see all subcategories:
Dancers

Directors

Musicians

Magicians

Writers and critics

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

Categories

Click the "►" below to see all subcategories:
Writers

Comics writers

Click the "►" below to see all subcategories:

Romance authors

Lists

Poets

Click the "►" below to see all subcategories:
Poets

Stubs

Authors / Writers deletions

Authors / Writers deletion sorting discussions


Authors

Wayne Caparas

Wayne Caparas (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Wayne Caparas" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Struggling to find independent in-depth coverage in reliable sources - lack of WP:SIGCOV. Fails WP:BIO and WP:GNG. Promotional article, created by the son of the subject. Edwardx (talk) 00:48, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. MT TrainDiscuss 05:12, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. MT TrainDiscuss 05:12, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Veysel Donbaz - Sumerologist

Veysel Donbaz - Sumerologist (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Veysel Donbaz - Sumerologist" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

An entirely-unsourced personal bio (only refs are to amazon.com listings). I don't see any claim that meets WP:NPROF. power~enwiki (π, ν) 20:22, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. MT TrainDiscuss 04:39, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. MT TrainDiscuss 04:39, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete - There are a few sources out there, but they don't appear to be in-depth enough to show he passes WP:GNG, and his citation count is not of the level needed to show he passes WP:NSCHOLAR. If enough sourcing is found, and the decision is to keep, the article should be moved to remove the disambiguation of "Sumerologist", since this is the only article about someone by that name. Onel5969 TT me 13:34, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 18:47, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Archaeology-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 18:47, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 18:47, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment, WorldCat appears to show quite a few books authored (joint) by Donbaz, with Neo-Assyrian legal texts in Istanbul being held in 60 libraries and Middle Assyrian Texts from Assur at the Eski Şark Eserleri Müzesi in İstanbul being held in 50 libraries- does this make his works "well known" (probably in this field?) thus meeting part of no. 3 of WP:AUTHOR (now where are those reviews:))? Coolabahapple (talk) 19:04, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment, oh, here are a couple: review of Middle Assyrian Texts from Assur at the Eski Sark Eserleri Muzesi in Istanbul inAula Orientalis and review of Keilschrifttexte in den Antiken-Museen zu Stambul, II. (Chief Scriptures in the Antique Museums to Stambul) in Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies :) Coolabahapple (talk) 19:56, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete. Article is a CV, though that could be fixed with editing. Several papers with low double-digit citations (h-index 9) is below our conventional threshold level for academics. Glad to switch positions if there's more here that could be found. Agricola44 (talk) 16:55, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Éric Toussaint

Éric Toussaint (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Éric Toussaint" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Couldn't find appropriate sources Rolf H Nelson (talk) 06:25, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 20:21, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep. I found a few sources: [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]. His books are also pretty popular according to worldcat: Your Money or Your Life is held by 896 libraries, and Debt, the IMF, and the World Bank is held by 290. --Cerebellum (talk) 15:14, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 09:37, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:54, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:54, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Economics-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:54, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep. I've found several sources as well. Probably meets the academic or author requirements, but neither of those were grounds for deletion. SportingFlyer (talk) 06:32, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Roy Clinton (“Bud”) Johns, Jr.

Roy Clinton (“Bud”) Johns, Jr. (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Roy Clinton (“Bud”) Johns, Jr." – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)
(Find sources: "Roy Johns" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)
(Find sources: "Bud Johns" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Non-notable individual lacking support to establish notability. reddogsix (talk) 22:06, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 00:12, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 00:12, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Probable Keep There is WP:SIGCOV, such as this 1981 UPI story: 40-mile Ride and Tie; New kind of marathon is based on Old West practice.E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:53, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment - This is hardly in-depth or non-trivial sourcing. reddogsix (talk) 17:24, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
  • WP:HEYMANN I added a few sources. The many varieties of his name may be part of the problem here. Searching under "Bud Johns" it is easy to establish such facts as his major role as a successful, longtime communications director building the Levis brand. And even easier to show that he is credited with being the founder of the modern sport of Ride and Tie, sourcing on that has WP:SIGCOV in many articles that I have not added to the page (I added a handful of what I saw) and it is certainly a valid claim to notability. His role as founder is widely covered over many years in WP:RS. Certainly article can and should be improved using the many sources available, with the caveat that sources about activities in the 1970s and 80s don't pop up at the top of searches. Nom came to this when it was a virtually unsourced page on a person whose very common name and nickname make searching difficult, but WP:HEY, this page now meets WP:ANYBIO, criterion #2 : he founded a pretty popular sport. Not a sport I previously knew about, but the news media sure covers Ride and Tie and his role in establishing it.E.M.Gregory (talk) 10:52, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment - The article Is still lacking in-depth, non-trivial support to establish [[WP:N].
  • Keep. The article has very good references, and it fulfills all the notability requirements, it should be kept in the enciclopedia.Fructisgarnier (talk) 22:30, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment - The article Is still lacking in-depth, non-trivial support to establish [[WP:N].

Chaker Khazaal

Chaker Khazaal (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Chaker Khazaal" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Issues of the first and second nomination have bot been fixed yet. This article is still full of unreliable sources like interviews, blogs, author profile of news blogs, press release etc. I don't understand why this guy is so badly in need of this Wikipedia article, trying again and again to republish his article. Being a refugee and winning some non notable awards don't make him notable. Mar11 (talk) 16:19, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 16:32, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lebanon-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 16:32, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Palestine-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 16:32, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 16:32, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 16:32, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

L. E. Barrett

L. E. Barrett (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "L. E. Barrett" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Non-notable individual. I am unable to find any substantial coverage of this person in reliable sources. The article is written by the subject as can be seen by looking at the image licensing information. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:00, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 13:54, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 13:54, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 13:54, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maine-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 13:54, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete Not notable, per nom. JoJo Anthrax (talk) 17:49, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Nom asserts that he "unable to find any substantial coverage of this person in reliable sources" , but the article has linked citations to some WP:RS, some are local, but at least one, Bringing wilds of Maine to the table, a Q & A author interview in the Boston Globe is a major, non-local, big-city daily.E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:37, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete interviews do not show notability, they are not counted as indepdent sources, and do not add towards GNG.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:45, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
  • An interview in a WP:RS such as a major big-city daily newspaper certainly counts towards notability.E.M.Gregory (talk) 21:44, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep The article can be improved, but E.M.Gregory has demonstrated the existence of RS directly covering the subject. Davey2116 (talk) 22:22, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Frank A. Flower

Frank A. Flower (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Frank A. Flower" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Municipal Statistician of Superior, Wisconsin does not pass WP:POLOUTCOMES. The books authored by Flower do not credibly indicate how they pass WP:AUTHOR. Having once received a letter from Booker T. Washington does not pass WP:GNG as notability is not inherited (or transferred via post). Masters theses (unlike doctoral dissertations) are not generally RS and being the subject of one probably doesn't contribute to GNG. A WP:BEFORE finds a handful of fleeting references largely of a bibliographical nature sourcing his books. Ultimately, this comes down to the question: "if you are from the 19th century, are you inherently notable?" I don't believe so. Chetsford (talk) 00:20, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 00:24, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wisconsin-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 00:24, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete. I agree on the basis of WP:POLOUTCOMES. Centibyte(talk) 00:40, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep worldcat here shows 1467 library holdings of his books with 17, 18, 14 editions of some of them in print for over 100-130 years and editions as late as 2015, passes WP:NAUTHOR as a significant body of work (monument).Atlantic306 (talk) 20:53, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
Is 1,467 library holdings the numerical threshold NAUTHOR uses to determine if something constitutes a "significant monument"? Anna Brooke, author of Frommer's Easy Guide to Paris 2013 Edition, has 2,017 library holdings of her book according to Worldcat. Is Frommer's Easy Guide to Paris 2013 Edition also a significant monument of world literature? Chetsford (talk) 21:37, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
It has not been in print for 130 years like Flower's works Atlantic306 (talk) 22:04, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
So once a book is 130 years old it becomes a "significant monument" of world literature? I don't think that's what's meant by "monument" in NAUTHOR. Chetsford (talk) 22:14, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep. Was notable back then, appearing in Who's Who, Harper's Encyclopedia, DC Biographies, Blue Book, NYTimes Book Review, Other NYTimes articles. Will continue adding to article. StrayBolt (talk) 09:25, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep and Withdraw as Nom Based on the sources StrayBolt has dug-up, and the substantial rescue improvements made to the article, clearly passes GNG. Chetsford (talk) 17:42, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Suzanne Olsson

Suzanne Olsson (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Suzanne Olsson" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

WP:BLP1E of a self-published author, originally started by COI editors. Subject is butting heads with religious people, with obvious results. Resoundingly deleted in 2008. Guy (Help!) 12:53, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. MT TrainDiscuss 12:57, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. MT TrainDiscuss 12:57, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. MT TrainDiscuss 12:57, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. —BarrelProof (talk) 19:01, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. —BarrelProof (talk) 19:04, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment - given most of the citations date from after 2008, the result of a discussion of notability at that time may not reflect the current situation. The content has also changed appreciably since it was started by COI editor(s), enough so that the subject and her proxies have tried repeatedly to white-wash and/or blank the article (of which this [10] is typical in its insistence that she should be allowed to 'lock in' her own text, or else the page should be deleted), so I am not sure that the fact that it was started by COI editors means anything anymore. Anyhow, there have been two more recent AfDs (and two MfDs) on this subject's BLPs that reflect a broader diversity of opinion: Agricolae (talk) 15:22, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Suzanne Olsson 2006, keep
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Suzanne Olsson 2008, resounding delete
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:SuzanneOlsson/sandbox 2008, resounding keep
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Abandoned Drafts/Suzanne M. Olsson 2013, keep
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Suzanne M. Olsson 2013, delete
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Suzanne Marie Olsson 2014, resounding keep
Let me add to this comment that "Subject is butting heads with religious people, with obvious results", which I take to be derived from the claims in the latest BLP Noticeboard demand for the page to be deleted, is at best an over-simplification. Many of the editors with whom she and her proxies have butted heads are anti-fringe skeptics, not (or at least not only) 'religious people'. Agricolae (talk) 16:34, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment I am tending, slightly, towards keep. The coverage in the Indian press is significant but I can see how BLP1E could be argued if that is all there is. I am tending away from 1E because of ongoing coverage of her theories as well as a few citations in other works. Whether that coverage is sufficient to overcome the tendency to presume lack of notability for self-published authors is where the balance lies for me. As the article stands and after the many deletion discussions, I do not think that 'started by a COI editor' has bearing on this AfD. Jbh Talk 15:56, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Question: It has been suggested that this is a BLP1E, a biography of a living person known only for one event. What is the event? —BarrelProof (talk) 18:35, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
    • "her self-published book, Jesus in Kashmir, The Lost Tomb, documented her research into the belief that the Roza Bal shrine in Srinagar, Kashmir, contains the remains of Jesus" --Orange Mike | Talk 01:11, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
      • Perhaps it is stating the obvious, but a book is not an event. It also appears that she has written three books, according to the article. It doesn't really matter whether her books are self-published or not. What matters is whether they, and she, are notable or not. —BarrelProof (talk) 05:48, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
      • Weak keep. The accusation of WP:BLP1E clearly does not apply, since there is no particular event involved. There is no WP:BLP1T policy saying we don't care about people known for only one theory, and many of the most notable people in the world are only known for promoting one theory. It doesn't matter whether her works are self-published or not and doesn't matter whether her theory is a fringe theory or not; what matters is whether she and her works are notable or not. There are even some people who are clearly considered notable for only self-publishing work that is generally regarded as random nonsense, and that doesn't stop an article about such a person from becoming a "Featured article". There is coverage supporting notability, cited in the article by The Times of India, India Today, UCA News, Global Press Journal, New Straits Times, and Dawn. None of those seem to be fringe or self-published sources. —BarrelProof (talk) 17:43, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep. I forget how I stumbled across this topic; perhaps it was via WP:SPI. Anyway, I found that a page had been deleted under WP:G5, about a topic which I found to be of encyclopedic value, and for which there was sufficient independent coverage in multiple reliable sources (Times of India, Dawn, New Straits Times etc) to establish notability. I therefore re-created a version of the article, which was promptly welcomed on the talk page as an improvement. – Fayenatic London 21:31, 15 February 2018 (UTC) Note to closing admin: Fayenatic london (talkcontribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this XfD.
    • DELETE with Comment Fayenatic, when did you become the article creator? I seem to have missed something. Although your contributions are among the best, they never remained long, more edit wars ensued. Olsson mentioned several times that her grandchildren created the very first page years ago on Wikipedia. Then, as mentioned above, she butted heads or offended several religions including Christians, Muslims, and Hindus. The page has been ruthlessly edited through the years and bears no resemblance to the original contents. If the page is kept, the edit wars will continue. Nothing will improve, the biography will continue to lack neutrality (such as referring to it as a 'fringe' topic and only publishing quotes in support of those views) deleting any mention of her Red Cross/Red Crescent service in the region in the midst of the Taliban War, and more. These deletion decisions will be raised again. And again. Therefore I strongly support 'delete' the page. Groshnik Sockpuppet blocked.
       — Berean Hunter (talk) 05:23, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
To answer your question, Fayenatic became the creator of the page in its current iteration on 11 August 2014, as is evident from the page's history. There is a long history here. The original page that Olsson claims was created by her grandchildren was deleted in 2008. User:SuzanneOlsson then created the page Suzanne M. Olsson in 2013, only to have it deleted shortly thereafter. Then Suzanne Marie Olsson was created by User:Granada2000, subsequently found to be a sock puppet of an account that was later found to be a sock puppet of SuzanneOlsson. The 2014 AfD for Suzanne Marie Olsson resulted in Keep, but then the page got deleted anyhow because it had been created by a sock puppet (Speedy deletion criteria G5). Fayenatic then resurrected the page and thus, at least nominally, is the 'creator' of its current incarnation, though with the deleted version inaccessible it is unclear how Fayenatic's version differed from the prior deleted version. Much of this arcane history is of little relevance to the current discussion, whether Suzanne Olsson is notable, and particularly, whether she is broadly notable or only noteworthy for a single event, as suggested in the nom. One thing does arise out of the history: Suzanne Olsson at least once and apparently twice created a page for herself. She obviously thinks she is notable, she just doesn't like the content that arises from others editing the page. Agricolae (talk) 23:50, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
If you have WP:RS to improve the article, bring them. The article has been peaceful since the latest socking, and history suggest that if deleted Olsson will recreate it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:13, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Hold on, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Groshnik has come from nowhere to request a blanking? Given the amount of sock-history with this article and previous AfD, we need to do a sock-check on this AfD also In ictu oculi (talk) 12:02, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
The argument made on BLPN is strikingly similar to those previously made by socks and COI, proxies of Olsson, with its demand that she should be able to provide the text and then the article should be frozen to prevent anything negative from being added, or failing that, deleted. We have seen that exact either/or several times before. Agricolae (talk) 16:20, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete Sources support an article on the tomb claim, not the person. TheValeyard (talk) 22:45, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete per TheValeyard and per WP:INHERITED. --Calton | Talk 01:37, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep unfortunately passes WP:NAUTHOR in Gbooks, the fact that this is a beyond the fringe author doesn't affect the general pop notability, although really the article should have a reception paragraph to make it clear that this entire set of theories is gullible westerners buying into Ahmaddiya muslim misreading of earlier muslim adaptations of the life of Buddha to the grave of a muslim saint as the grave of Jesus. She's not the only fringe western author pushing the Ahmaddiya story, and the others like Holger Kersten have articles, since they also, regrettably, also pass WP:NAUTHOR. That's just life unfortunately fringe authors can collect notability too, if not collect more notability than qualified academics. The commented about WP:INHERITED is incorrect by the way, of the various western fans of this she's probably acquired more "fame" than the others. In ictu oculi (talk) 11:59, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
The 7 first books in your gbooks link are selfpublished, how does it support NAUTHOR? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:09, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
I wouldn't be surprised if every one of those several 100 Gbooks isn't self-published, it's very rare for serious publishers to wade into the open cistern of populist fringe on this kind of subject, same as Mary Magdalene-Da Vinci-Lost Grail fringe. Bu that doesn't prevent those books having disproportionate popular reach. In ictu oculi (talk) 18:24, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Several 100? I see 3 pages, maybe it´s a EU-data-law thing. And the first page already has a swedish librarian by the same name. This [11] gbook-search may be more on point. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:39, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep While the person is not specifically notable as an author, the fact is that the shrine has become notable in itself. The fact is that her name appears in articles about the shrine, and is a bone of contention between Muslims in the area,, and Christians. That is, the contention is notable and is not otherwise covered directly in Wikipedia even though it has been the subject of a BBC documentary etc. Collect (talk) 14:41, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep per BarrelProof. Groshnik said "The page has been ruthlessly edited through the years and bears no resemblance to the original contents." Yes, on WP this lands somewhere between standard and quite desirable. Not being directly under the subjects control is one of the things that gives WP some value, and gives it some interest. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:10, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Very, VERY weak keep--though the BLP1E argument isn't bad, if one argues that it's not about the book but about the shenanigans in Sranigar. The book's notability is also just really tenuous; it's fringe, of course, and In ictu oculi, I think you overestimate what Google Books does: many of your search results don't actually contain your search term (they're just somehow "associated"). This shows up but doesn't mention Olsson. And what a hit like this one does is not clear: it lists Olsson in the bibliography, but doesn't cite or discuss it. In other words, I see nothing that is actually reliable which discusses that book. And if FRINGE requires us to find serious sources that discuss weird stuff, well, this one fails too: note how the "Critical reception" section is completely unsourced, and so "Scholarly opinion unanimously rejects the arguments in Suzanne Olson's books", which would be the nicest thing one can say in terms of notability, isn't even verified. The more I look at this, the more I am convinced that we might as well delete this, so here we go: delete. Drmies (talk) 18:39, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
FWIW, that section is a very recent addition, as I remember things were reasonably well-sourced after the war of ca april 2017. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:44, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Yes I just dropped that in in a hurry related to the comments above that if it stays it should have some critical content on the basic thesis. Which is difficult because she is the latest rehash of things that were rejected by scholars in relation to the earlier fringe writers like Kersten. In the event of a delete I would rather a blank and redirect to the Roza Bal article (where she will still warrant a mention because of the Straits Times and Times of India references) in order to keep track on the sock issue. Should the socks come back trying to plant a promotional article. Unless they take the view that Wikipedia is hopelessly against fringe (hence their wish for it to be deleted this time). In ictu oculi (talk) 18:48, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
If deleted, I agree. She's a "See also" there now, but that be changed to a sentence or two. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:53, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
So to be absolutely clear the option here if deleted is redirect to preserve page history rather than just atomize. In ictu oculi (talk) 22:19, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
@Drmies: GBooks drives me nuts at times. As you suggest, many of it's hits are simply useless as they contain nothing substantial (or trivial) about what you think you're looking for. GScholar pulls up all sorts of non-scholarly nonsense, someone should gets the trades description act people after them. Doug Weller talk 14:18, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
Drmies, better? [12]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:46, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
Um. No, not really better, unless the first one actually mentions Olsson by name as "fiction", he doesn't just mean all the Ahmaddiya/Kersten material is "fiction". It is easy enough to source the big name scholars who have already rejected the thesis since Olsson is just recycling Holger Kersten and others. Rather than deleting the scholars who reject the thesis simply copy across sources from the Holger Kersten article. Sourcing isn't a problem here. The lack of anything new with Olsson rather than her self-promotion and run in with the local muslim gravekeepers is the only issue. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:04, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
Let's do this at Talk:Suzanne_Olsson#Critical_reception. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:30, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete. Fringe, but not notable and promotional. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:04, 16 February 2018 (UTC).
  • Blank and redirect as suggested above. What I see at Google books is mainly trivial mentions, a link to her website, etc. Doug Weller talk 14:18, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
  • DELETE. To all of you Wiki editors who are voting to delete my Biography page, I am requesting speedy deletion. For years I have endured subtle yet significant negative edits. Beginning with emphasis that I claimed to be a descendant of Jesus (ommiting iinclusion about the laws of Islam regarding DNA recovery), or that I wrote on a fringe topic which is widely discredited by scholars, or that I personally disrupted the Roza Bal shrine, threatened the caretakers, and had my visa cancelled for upsetting local religious feelings…or that the shrine is a local "Muslim" shrine and all locals discredit the claims that it is associated with Jesus. Now take a look at other authors and other pages on this topic. Take a look at the biographies for [Kashmiri], [Kersten], [Hassnain], and all Ahmaddi commentaries. At no time, and in no way are these people accused of being unotable for discussing fringe theories, upsetting local Muslim beliefs, ‘Self-promoting” fringe theories, et cetera. A few editors (who I seem to have upset personally) have repeatedly slanted my biography to discredit and diminish me in every subtle way possible. This is unfair, inaccurate, And this hurts. Several comments and so-called ‘public sourced references’ are removed from context, giving a false impression-for example the claim that I "upset local Muslim beliefs resulting in shrine being closed and my visa being canceled". Then why is there no record of this also happening when Aziz Kashmiri or Holger Kersten or Fida Hassnain or [Bakar Salahuddin] (and here) were investigating the shrine and the relics? Why is there no mention of them being signaled out or discredited for publishing “fringe theories” you disparage me with? This is never mentioned on their Wiki Biography pages. When the Gvt. Of India film crews (led by Yashendra Prasad) arrived at the Roza Bal shrine, like me )I was there in the midst of the Taliban War- terrorism was everywhere!) they were also in the midst of terrorism and violence, threatened, forbidden in the tomb, and driven away with threats of violence. Why signal me out as though I was the only one to arrive and “offend local Muslim beliefs”? The entire world seems to offend Muslim beliefs. The Roza Bal is documented to be almost 2,000 years old. How can it be a “Muslim” shrine, when Islam itself was only founded 1500 years ago? You editors are the ones not making any sense here. I could go on, but the point is this: I do not believe the current wiki editors are being fair or balanced. I do not believe they ever will be. I am requesting a speedy deletion and beg that jno one start another wiki page about me or my book of no consequence. You made your points. Wiki has done me more harm than all the terrorists I ever encountered in India or Pakistan. It has never been the Wiki policy to allow contentious, slanted, derogatory or biased material inserted in to Biographies. Further, you each have entirely overlooked the fact that expanding retrieval of ancient DNA from Roza Bal and other ancient tombs, whether by me or others, is a vital step to arriving at the truth. Yet you all conveniently overlook this Project and rant on about what a “disruption” I am, and have “nothing new” to offer this field of investigation. I am sorry you feel that way. I assure you much is happening behind the scenes that is not yet known publicly. I have worked tirelessly for the protection and research at these ancient tombs. One day all the years of continued research will be clear. For now, I feel helpless against the current lot of Wiki editors here-some of us have been at loggerheads for years...that is why I beg for a speedy deletion. I assure you that neither myself nor anyone in my family has any desire to see another Wiki page about me ever inserted here again. If you cant be fair and balanced, then at least leave me alone and do no harm. That is the wiki policy you have forgotten to apply. Thank you. 205.173.37.113 (talk) 17:28, 17 February 2018 (UTC)Suzanne Olsson
It has never been Wikipedia's policy to allow notable subjects to whitewash their articles, to remove well-documented material or an entire well-documented page just because they don't like it. When (hypothetically) someone has managed primarily to get themselves reported repeatedly in a negative light, that can produce an article that, though negative in tone, is fully in line with Wikipedia policy. Wikipedia aims at giving a 'fair and balanced' representation of the individual from the perspective of the coverage they have received (WP:UNDUE), not based on their own self-image. Articles on the clearly non-notable should be deleted and those of marginally-notable people can be, but in saying "in no way are these people accused of being unotable for discussing fringe theories" you seem to indicate you consider yourself notable, that you have received sufficient coverage to have an article. However, if that is the case, the article must reflect that coverage, giving particular weight to the coverage that provides the notability, even if that coverage is negative. Without commenting on your entire WP:SOAPBOX, Wikipedia cares not one iota about what you happen to think "is a vital step to arriving at the truth" nor your predictions about what you personally think "will be clear" at some point in the future, all completely irrelevant. What is happening "behind the scenes that is not yet known publicly" is by definition not fodder for Wikipedia.(WP:V) This discussion is not about Speedy deletion, which is distinct from the AfD process, and previous requests for a speedy deletion of this page have been declined based on a failure to meet any of the established criteria - this AfD must take its course. (And since User:Groshnik appeared out of nowhere to make the same demand for a speedy deletion, I have to wonder. . . .) On the other hand, if on conclusion of this discussion it is determined that the subject is not notable at this time, any attempt to create a new page will be subject to speedy deletion (WP:G4) unless notability will have since been acquired by additional coverage. Agricolae (talk) 19:25, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
Agricolae:: you completely misrepresent this discussion -- this is not about "me" or if I 'think' I am famous or notable, or if I rehashed an old story - a fringe topic---or if I dont like the way I am represented in the article. This is about bad Wiki editors who denegrade and misrepresent a topic and person..."in a negative light..." knowing that supporting facts are ignored-(for example, overlooking the entire Taliban War as a major contributing factor to the problems at the tomb)- done with intention and - deliberate malice- Your defense-- "this is fully in line with Wikipedia policy" is totally false. No it is is not. This has never been wikipedia policy. You have not applied the same standards of reporting to other authors and researchers connected with Roza Bal and 'Jesus in India' theories. My goodness, you all didn't even have the decency and normalcy to insert a proper link to my "dreadful self-published book." I can find no other author, self-published or not- anywhere on Wikipedia- where such an appropriate link would be missing....no matter how bad the book or the author is regarded! I have many years of records of wikipedia editing that reflects malice and bias. Enough is enough. Delete the page. Go edit some of those more 'notable' people you are always comparing me with....I'm sure they'll just love you for it. Thank you. 205.173.37.113 (talk) 21:29, 17 February 2018 (UTC) Suzanne Olsson205.173.37.113 (talk) 21:29, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
Except I don't think I do misrepresent it. The only non-stale objection raised in the nom is lack of notability. You say 'delete', but leave the distinct impression that you think you are notable, which would mean you think that sole rationale for deletion is untrue. There is a dissonance there. What you dispute is not that you are notable enough for there to be a page, but what the content of that page should be, an entirely different complaint and one usually addressed on Talk pages and through conflict resolution, not by deleting the page (not what AfDs or speedy deletion are for). You call for the negative press to be tempered based on an external context you think is relevant, but were one to distort the plain reading of a source text based on anything else, that runs the risk of violating WP:NOR and/or WP:SYNTH - appropriate representation of sourced material requires that the text be changed to match the sources, not that the sources be reinterpreted to match the desired text. It is indeed within Wikipedia policy to have a page with a negative tone if that is what is found in the majority of reliable, independent sources about the individual. The problem comes when someone creates too much bad press to be balanced by what little (if any) non-negative coverage they receive. And are you really complaining that Wikipedia isn't helping you advertise your book? Finally, you don't get to decide what pages I edit (and I have never compared you to anyone else, except your various sock and meat puppets). Agricolae (talk) 23:35, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
This rather suggests whatever the result here, delete or merge/mention, a sockwatch will be ongoing. In ictu oculi (talk) 21:26, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
Delete, merge-mention, or keep. I don't see any outcome that will bring an end to the problem. The Groshnik sock already said as much if it gets kept, and after the 2008 deletion the subject waited 5 years and then tried to sneak in a recreation under two different namespaces, once using a sock account. Any way it comes out, it seems, there will likely be need for sockwatch. Agricolae (talk) 23:22, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Lammin Sullay

Lammin Sullay (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Lammin Sullay" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Fails all elements of WP:AUTHOR and there are only a few passing mentions so GNG isn't met. His big claim to fame appears to be starting a WP:NN newspaper that had 6 editions before closing. Failed CSD because "sources". Toddst1 (talk) 02:42, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. MT TrainDiscuss 05:34, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. MT TrainDiscuss 05:34, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finland-related deletion discussions. MT TrainDiscuss 05:34, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Brett Sutherlin

Brett Sutherlin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Brett Sutherlin" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Cannot find any independent in-depth coverage in reliable sources - lack of WP:SIGCOV. Fails WP:BIO. Run-of-the-mill businessman. Promotional article, created by a WP:SPA. Edwardx (talk) 20:33, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:23, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:23, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:23, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:23, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete as PROMO. Alleged "best selling" book, Change Agents, may have hit some best-selletr list or other, but I can find no reviews or SIGCOV of it or of Sutherlin.E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:16, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Rory Fatt

Rory Fatt (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Rory Fatt" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Cannot find any independent in-depth coverage in reliable sources - lack of WP:SIGCOV. Fails WP:BIO. Run-of-the-mill businessman. Promotional article. None of the references provided help towards WP:GNG. Edwardx (talk) 20:45, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:19, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:19, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:19, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of British Columbia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:19, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete as mere PROMO unsupported by WP:RS. Lede reads: "an entrepreneur, consultant and author, with the bulk of his clients being American." Problem is, there are no verifiable, independent sources. He is described as "Fatt is the former Marketing Editor for the Hospitality News.," a non-notable job, sourced only to Hospitality News. Article also asserts that "Fatt has been featured in..." a list of publicattions that includes at least one WP:RS, the Rocky Mountain News, problem is, the citation is to "“The Street Smart Secret To Getting New Customers To Your Restaurant. Hospitality News Rocky Mtn. States Edition, pg. 9." which is not the rocky Mountain News, but the publication Fatt worked for. He may have written this ad other articles listed, in non-notable publications. There is no indication of notability and no SIGCOV.E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:11, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete. Nothing here is a strong claim to passing our notability standards for entrepreneurs, consultants or writers, and all of the sourcing in the article is complete crap with nary a hint of even one reliable source for the purposes of clearing WP:GNG. I can't prove it outright, but this is exactly the sort of "trying really hard but completely missing the boat" article that normally pings my conflict of interest radar. Bearcat (talk) 01:50, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Drew McLellan

Drew McLellan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Drew McLellan" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Struggling to find any independent in-depth coverage in reliable sources - lack of WP:SIGCOV. Fails WP:BIO. Run-of-the-mill businessman. Promotional article, created by a WP:SPA. Plenty of stuff about him out there, but all written by him or one of his companies. Edwardx (talk) 20:51, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:17, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:17, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:17, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:17, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iowa-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:17, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete, not notable for stand alone article. Trivial promo piece and Wikipedia is not a newspaper. Kierzek (talk) 18:39, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete Mere PROMO for a nonnotable "national expert" (in branding and marketing.) His "book" is a selfpublished e-book described on the page as "available free" for downloading.E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:00, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Shama Khalid

Shama Khalid (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Shama Khalid" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

no in-depth coverage in RS. most of the bio contains OR and is not inline cited. Saqib (talk) 04:50, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. MT TrainDiscuss 05:24, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. MT TrainDiscuss 05:24, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
  • delete - nothing in coverage. Fails WP:NWRITER. Störm (talk) 09:56, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete it fails WP:GNG.  samee  talk 13:39, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete Unsourced, apparent PROMO. Searches for her turn up article on other, more prominent Pakistanis with the same name.E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:57, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Search for her on news return related article google book returns her books [1] [2] Pheeca93 (talk) 21:13, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

G.C. Dilsaver

G.C. Dilsaver (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "G.C. Dilsaver" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Fails WP:BASIC, WP:ANYBIO and WP:AUTHOR. Unable to locate significant secondary sources to support notability. Magnolia677 (talk) 03:39, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 04:25, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 04:25, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 04:25, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak Delete - I find a few results searching google news, they are a bit bloggy and not really about Dilsaver but about how his book's inspired the blogs author. Results on google books are also mostly about his book and are passing. Neither of these sets of results give anything that would show the subject has enough coverage to write an article that passes NPOV concerns, especially given the promotional nature of the article and of the coverage. Smmurphy(Talk) 20:37, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Strong Maintain - Maintain as secondary reference supported. All claims have references that have been previously verified.

The claim to notability is the Catholic Pontifical University of America's stating in its review of his work that they consider him "the father of Christian psychology" [3] [4] His work has been critiqued as the first truly Thomistic psychology by [5].

International recognition: [6]

and [7] His book was chosen and endorsed among the very few books offered with membership from this prestigious international organization.

Dilsaver also has a full page on his work in the introduction to the definitive english edition of [8] [9]

I took much of the language to describe his work from the website, not as a promotion per se but to accurately convey its nature and claims. John Galvin (talk) 19:14, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://www.google.com/search?tbs=bks:1&q=%22Shama+Khalid%22
  2. ^ https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Shama+Khalid%22&tbm=nws
  3. ^ https://www.hfsbooks.com/books/imago-dei-psychotherapy-dilsaver/
  4. ^ https://web.archive.org/web/20131203134340/http://cuapress.cua.edu/books/viewbook.cfm?book=XDID
  5. ^ Kenneth Baker, S.J. in the August/September 2008 issue of Homiletic & Pastoral Review
  6. ^ http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/commentandblogs/2013/08/14/restoring-the-image-of-god-in-our-lives-protects-our-mental-health/
  7. ^ https://humanlife.ie/
  8. ^ John Paul II The Theology of the Body; A New Translation Based on the John Paul II Archives Translation, Index, and Introduction by Michael Waldstein Pauline BOOKS & MEDIA Boston
  9. ^ https://www.scribd.com/doc/79394300/Waldstein-Introduction-to-Theology-of-the-Body
  • Delete as mere PROMO for non-notable author of non-notable books promoting his personal, nonnotable FRINGE theory of mental illness. inadequate sourcing found.E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:53, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Terry W. Burns

Fabian Tassano

Fabian Tassano (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Fabian Tassano" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

non-notable Wikihmc (talk) 17:21, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 07:29, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 07:29, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 07:29, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 07:29, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 07:29, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 07:29, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 07:29, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 07:29, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Keep - has sources that prove notability. Jonpatterns (talk) 11:31, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 09:38, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete not enough reliable sources to pass the general notability guidelines.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:40, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep - There are sufficient reliable sources. Ranger2006(talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:02, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

The addition of the proposal-for-deletion flag appears to have been malicious, and a possible instance of sock puppetry.

It was added by someone (86.84.64.37) who ostensibly has no previous history of editing articles on Wikipedia. One minute later a comment endorsing the deletion proposal appeared, from a Wikipedia identity (Wikihmc) which likewise has no previous history of editing.

I find it implausible that someone with no previous experience as a Wikipedia editor should make their first edit the endorsement of an article-deletion proposal.Ranger2006 (talk) 11:49, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Keep - sufficiently notable. Akkadius (talk) 14:23, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Can someone do an actual analysis of sourcing beyond saying "there are enough" or "there aren't enough"?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ansh666 05:59, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Dean Shomshak

Dean Shomshak (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Dean Shomshak" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Appears to be a run-of-the-mill game writer with no external signs of notability Mattyjohn (talk) 01:03, 29 January 2018 (UTC).

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Every Morning (there's a halo...) 01:18, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep if more sources can be found, otherwise move to WP:DRAFT-space so it can be worked on. BOZ (talk) 23:35, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete run of the mill coverage, nothing of note.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:28, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep Interesting one - he's a reasonably prolific author in an under-reported field, working in an era when most of the publications were in print and not online. Therefore, notability is going to be harder to establish than just hitting Google. Looks notable to me under category three of WP:CREATIVE, given that he's contributed significantly to both Dungeons & Dragons and the World of Darkness. Also likely to meet WP:AUTHOR as reviews exist of his works, both on and offline for example Orpheus and EverQuest RPG GM Guide. Adders (talk) 19:10, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 08:22, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. North America1000 16:19, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: relist #2
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nakon 04:42, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete the article isn't even a biography but just a list of works by a particular author, none of which appear to be notable on their own. SportingFlyer (talk) 16:52, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Tools

Main tool page: toolserver.org
  • 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=812163032"
This content was retrieved from Wikipedia : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Biography/Arts_and_entertainment
This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article "Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Arts and entertainment"; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA