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. Ozgod (talk · contribs)
  9. Eremeyv (talk · contribs)
  10. Susanlesch (talk · contribs), mostly inactive
  11. EraserGirl (talk) 03:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
  12. Shruti14 (talk · contribs) will help when I can
  13. 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.
  14. Jarhed (talk · contribs) 21:01, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
  15. Mvzix (talk · contribs)
  16. Cassianto (talk · contribs)
  17. Iamthecheese44 (talk · contribs)
  18. Georgiasouthernlynn (talk · contribs)
  19. Fitindia (talk · contribs)
  20. BabbaQ (talk · contribs)
  21. Woodstop45 (talk · contribs)
  22. 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

Working in layers

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

PROD reverted without improvement. Original research since 2006. A search today did not turn up authoritative sources, although I bet there must be some. The article fails WP:V unless it can be substantiated. Rhadow (talk) 13:43, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. ʍaɦʋɛօtʍ (talk) 14:52, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. ʍaɦʋɛօtʍ (talk) 14:52, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Speedy Keep as the nominator does not appear to have read or understood the article. It explains that "in the early 15th century Cennino D'Andrea Cennini describes how to paint in layers" and so there's an authoritative source in plain sight. It is, of course, easy to find modern sources which confirm this such as the Grove Encyclopedia of Materials and Techniques in Art. The nominator also does not seem to understand WP:V which only requires citations for quotations and controversial material. Andrew D. (talk) 16:08, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep, though there is a case for a merge to Oil painting. It's certainly a thing. I'm mystified by the claimed difficulty in finding sources - there are hundreds, very easily found. Johnbod (talk) 18:09, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep and Topic Ban for any more of these unexamined prods and AfDs. This is a technique so well known even I've heard of it. It's obvious (as for all the others) that the nominator is making no efforts at WP:BEFORE before any of these. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:24, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep This has been a core technique in oil painting for hundreds of years and as Johnbod has demonstrated, there are many sources, historical and contemporary. Working in layers is also done in acrylic painting and in digital painting (e.g., Photoshop or Painter layers). The article does need some work, but there is nothing like copyvio that requires deletion. A highly notable topic and no insurmountable content problems suggest keeping the article. --Mark viking (talk) 21:46, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Yuki Amemiya

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

This article has been notability tagged since 2008. Non-notable manga artist who co-wrote on 07-ghost and battle rabbits No Japanese Wikipedia article. Recommend merge to 07-Ghost her most notable manga. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 19:06, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 19:07, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 19:07, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 19:07, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 19:07, 16 November 2017 (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

Lene Auestad

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

One newspaper article, a few reviews of her books and links to several of her books and articles are not sufficient to establish notability according to WP:GNG and WP:PROF. Famousdog (c) 10:29, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 15:11, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 15:11, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 15:11, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 15:11, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. XOR'easter (talk) 19:13, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Tentative Keep Multiple positive reviews in scholarly journals of multiple books suggests a pass per WP:AUTHOR. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] I say "tentative" because some (not all) of these reviews are for volumes she edited, rather than books she wrote herself — still examples of her work being noted and approved of, but arguably less significant than reviews of single-author works. XOR'easter (talk) 19:41, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep per WP:AUTHOR, multiple books with multiple published reviews. However, the article text looks heavily promotional and possibly copied from elsewhere; I've trimmed some definite copyvio from the books section but the rest could probably also use attention. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:55, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Andrew Manis

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

Fails WP:PROF. All claims to notability uncited or cited with weak sources. Most notability claims added by subject of article. LaMenta3 (talk) 08:00, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. ʍaɦʋɛօtʍ (talk) 15:57, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. ʍaɦʋɛօtʍ (talk) 15:57, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. ʍaɦʋɛօtʍ (talk) 15:57, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions. ʍaɦʋɛօtʍ (talk) 15:57, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete clear fail of the general notability guidelines. Nothing adds up to meeting any academic notability criteria.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:33, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep as WP:AUTHOR; has written multiple books published by university presses and widely held: Worldcat identities. For example, Southern civil religions in conflict: Black and white Baptists and civil rights, 1947-1957 is held by 550 libraries. Sample reviews:
  • Book reviews: American. Hill, Samuel S. Catholic Historical Review, Oct 01, 1991; Vol. 77, No. 4, p. 722-723. Reviews the book `Southern Civil Religions in Conflict: Black and White Baptists and C... more
  • Blessed Are the Peacemakers/Birmingham Revolutionaries (Book). Fairclough, Adam. Georgia Historical Quarterly, Mar 01, 2002; Vol. 86, No. 1, p. 153-155. Reviews two books. 'Blessed Are the Peacemakers: Martin Luther King Jr., Eight White R... more
Additional reviews are very likely to be available. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:27, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:15, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Seth Skorkowsky

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

Little-known author with no reliable source backing up article. Searching for sources hasn't turned up anything better. Doesn't meet WP:NAUTHOR. Creator's username suggests COI. Yunshui  12:38, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. ʍaɦʋɛօtʍ (talk) 12:46, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. ʍaɦʋɛօtʍ (talk) 12:46, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. L3X1 (distænt write) 18:15, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
  • delete Fails the GNG. L3X1 (distænt write) 18:16, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete, does not meet WP:NAUTHOR or WP:GNG, have been unable to find any reviews from reliable sources (nothing from 1st 100 ghits of a search under "Seth Skorkowsky book reviews"), although some of his books are held by quite a few libraries ie. Mountain of daggers 68 libraries, Hounacier 72 libraries surprising that there are not even "trade" reviews available eg. nothing at Kirkus Reviews or Publishers Weekly. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:58, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Robert Baudin

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

Biography with notability issues and backed by just a couple of references, concentrating on one incident. There's no reliable source that goes into the details about his crime, apart from a couple of autobiographies that the individual wrote. MT TrainDiscuss 17:50, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. MT TrainDiscuss 17:53, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. MT TrainDiscuss 17:53, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:54, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:54, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep. Besides his own 2 books (which might be grounds for AUTHOR, did not assess), he has received SIGCOV for his flying and counterfeiting - both in major newspapers and in books. He is also covered by the Sydney Crime Musuem [6], which would seem to indicate lasting signifcance.Icewhiz (talk) 20:46, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep. There are numerous mentions of him in books other than his own, and sufficient coverage on him in newspapers and other sites (not just for the airplane stunt). These in addition to the Sydney Crime Museum would seem to merit encyclopedic inclusion. Since the person has been dead nearly 35 years it's not like this is a self-promotional article. SunChaser (talk) 05:45, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete -- A serial crook who wrote a book about his misdeeds and performed a stunt reported in national papers. Surely that is not enough to make him WP-notable. Peterkingiron (talk) 21:13, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Chanda Hahn

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

WP:BLP of a writer, with no strong claim of notability per WP:AUTHOR and no strong reliable sourcing to carry a claim that she passes WP:GNG in lieu. This is sourced 3/4 to her own self-published website about herself and 1/4 to a glancing namecheck of her existence in a blog post whose subject is a very general phenomenon, not to any proper evidence of reliable source coverage about her in real media. As always, every writer is not automatically entitled to have a Wikipedia article just because she exists -- an article has to be referenced to media coverage about her, not to her own website about herself, for a Wikipedia article to become earned. Bearcat (talk) 00:51, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

  • Delete due to absence of independent sources, plus near-certain COI. Guy (Help!) 01:05, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 04:47, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 04:47, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom and per preceding comment ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 16:12, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete Of the 4 sources, 3 are by the subject and so are in no way independent. The 4th is identified as a blog at the top of it. It also only makes passing mention of the subject, in the context of new marketing techniques for ebook publishers. Plus the article references the University of Minneapolis, which redirects to the University of Minnesota, which I am pretty sure as a public institution does not offer a major in "children's ministry". So the article has major issues of content accuracy.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:03, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Michelle Law

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

Not enough evidence of having been discussed in depth in multiple reliable independent secondary sources. KDS4444 (talk) 14:11, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:28, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:28, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:29, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:30, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep I've just added a profile article from The Guardian in the context of her play Single White Female which got a lot of coverage in Australia earlier this year. She has received one of the Queensland Literary Awards and an AWGIE Award (albeit in reasonably minor categories), and had articles about her in at least the ABC and The Guardian. This easily passes notability. Boneymau (talk) 21:22, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep While there is not massive coverage there is definitely steady coverage by different multiple very reputable IRS over several years. Aoziwe (talk) 22:33, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep - Has KDS4444, who nominated this article for deletion within three hours of its being created, considered how demoralising this is for a new(ish) editor? The subject of this article seems to me to meet WP:GNG. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:52, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
Actually, though not relevant to this discussion, I see that KDS4444 has been blocked indefinitely. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 14:01, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep Agree it passes GNG. Kerry (talk) 23:29, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Mark A. Chambers

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

Article created and edited by WP:SPA editors. Fails WP:ARTIST no in-depth secondary sources to prove he passes the topic specific guideline or WP:GNG. Domdeparis (talk) 16:27, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 18:08, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 18:08, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:13, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete all of the references, as far as I can see, are primary sources on the book and as such are just passing mentions of the illustrator, who is the article subject. Lack of independent reliable sources = not notable. 198.58.171.47 (talk) 02:51, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete - trivial mentions only. PhilKnight (talk) 00:21, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Robbie Tripp

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

NOT TABLOID. Unless his wife is a public figure, this article has major BLP problems. DGG ( talk ) 06:09, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

  • Delete This is basically a WP:BLP1E - the 1E in this case is that the guy said he liked big women. The top news hit is a Daily Mail piece titled "I love her curvy body!", which doesn't exactly get us off to a flying start, there are other reliably sourced hits in Daily Telegraph, Washington Post and New Statesman, but ultimately that's just saying the same thing over and over again. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:14, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete: as the article states, he's best known for his connection with someone who has a red link. Not notable ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 11:21, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep: As stated by Ritchie333(talk) in the article's edit history when he removed first speedy deletion tag, the article has an overwhelming number of sources (30+ references) that speak to the notability of subject. Tripp is notable not only for the above mentioned viral post but also as an author, writer, and TEDx speaker. To deny a subject's credibility who has been discussed, cited, and featured in just about every major news source nationally and internationally is foolish. Clearly subject is notable on his own merits for more than one event and article discusses multiple notable works, thus not applicable to WP:BLP1E guidelines. Also, one could very easily reason that subject's wife is also a notable figure and deserves an article as well, thus strengthening this one. User:CrispinAspen (talk) 08:02, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 11:22, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 11:22, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete too promotional as written. There's no real claim that he's known for anything other than being known, and many of the references are to Facebook, YouTube, Amazon and the like. power~enwiki (π, ν) 01:16, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep: The "promotional" aspect can easily be fixed by editors without deleting entire article. In response to power~enwiki, are you just selectively (and biasly) looking at the references to get this article deleted?? Among the 30+ sources on this article that include The New York Times, ABC, TODAY, and Daily Mail, there is just one YouTube reference to the subject's TEDx talk (another work which makes him notable), just one Amazon reference to his book (being a published author also makes you notable), and then Facebook references for two major celebrities--Adam Levine and Tia Mowry--that shared and commented on Tripp's viral story. All the points being made on this discussion simply warrant appropriate edits being made, not the entire article being deleted. By every guideline (and common sense), subject is well-known, notable, and well-covered in a variety of major sources. User:CrispinAspen (talk) 02:48, 16 November 2017 (UTC)Duplicate keep struck TonyBallioni (talk) 16:58, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
    • Having a TEDx talk certainly doesn't make one notable, and neither does having Adam Levine share a post on Facebook. power~enwiki (π, ν) 02:52, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
    • But having a TEDx talk in addition to being a published author and social media personality covered in every major news source nationally and internationally certainly does. Is anyone looking at the lengthy citation list of reputable sources on this subject? There are bonafide A-list movie stars with less sources than this. I say again, article should be kept and improved by editors, not deleted entirely. User:CrispinAspen (talk) 06:16, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
The Daily Mail is not a good argument. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:52, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Fair enough, so keep the article and remove the reference. There is enough sources like BBC that are more than reputable. User:CrispinAspen (talk) 16:59, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete fails BLP1E and NOT TABLOID. Lepricavark (talk) 06:01, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
    • As is being discussed above, there is nothing that definitively fails the BLP1E guidelines. Subject is clearly notable and for more than one event/work. Article should remain and be improved by editors. User:CrispinAspen (talk) 16:55, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep Article should be kept for same reason Ritchie333(talk) removed speedy deletion tag when article was first created: "(plenty of sources, salvageable)." With this amount of references, it would be easy to reform any section with concerns. User:CrispinAspen (talk) 17:03, 17 November 2017 (UTC)Duplicate keep struck. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:11, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete no significant coverage about him and didn't meet SNG WP:AUTHOR  — Ammarpad (talk) 03:23, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
    • No significant coverage? Are you looking at the 30+ sources including The New York Times, BBC, TODAY, and ABC? Also, as mentioned above, there is nothing that definitively fails notability guidelines. Subject is clearly known and for more than one piece of work. WP:AUTHOR concerns aren't completely applicable here because subject is also social media personality. User:CrispinAspen (talk) 12:35, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
      • So he is not author but you write he is Author and he is Writer in the most important, first line in the lead section? And you say they don't apply? This calls the factual accuracy of the entire article into question and it should be deleted.  — Ammarpad (talk) 04:02, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
        • Re-read previous comment. Of course he is an author, what I'm saying is that he is not ONLY an author. He is also a social media figure, which should be taken into account as well. Subject is notable for more than just being an author. User:CrispinAspen (talk) 03:04, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
          • Since you now backtrack, and agree he is author, then WP:AUTHOR applies, and he fails it entirely.  — Ammarpad (talk) 03:21, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
            • Maybe English is not your first language so I understand why you are confused. I am not "backtracking," I am telling you to re-read my comment because clearly you did not understand it. Obviously subject is an author, but he is not ONLY an author. Tripp is notable for more than just being an author so there are other guidelines/factors to take into account. 30+ references in major sources is more than enough to establish notability and shape article. User:CrispinAspen (talk) 15:44, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Michal Levin

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

All sources in this article are primary sources. Searches for significant independent coverage come up empty. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 20:29, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:58, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:58, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Spirituality-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:58, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete No proof of notability found. gidonb (talk) 23:43, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

After reviewing the material I have made the following edits and have included the following independent sources:

  • Gary Baumgarten interview for Newstalk online 2007
  • Kindred Spirit Magazine article 2015
  • Telegraph Newspaper article 2002

NB the three books cited, written by Levin, are published by independent and established publishing houses - Hodder & Stoughton, Dorling Kindersley and Gill & McMillan — Preceding unsigned comment added by JosephineH1 (talkcontribs) JosephineH1 (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

For scanned copy of Hilary Pearson's Nov/Dec 2014 Kindred Spirit Article (no longer available online) email [email protected] — Preceding unsigned comment added by JosephineH1 (talkcontribs)

  • Comment @JosephineH1: Interviews given by the subject and articles written by the subject are not considered independent sources. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 11:54, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein  21:00, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Joshua Spanogle

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

Entire article (two lines) is a copy violation. Rathfelder (talk) 21:02, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:14, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:14, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
  • It's not a copyright violation, the alleged source is using text from the Wikipedia article ("This author page uses material from the Wikipedia article "Joshua Spanogle", which is released under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share-Alike License 3.0"). Hut 8.5 21:52, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete we lack the level of citation needed to establish notability, especially on an article on a living person.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:39, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep - He seems to have written three medical thrillers which are described here as bestsellers in the United States and sell on Amazon and elsewhere. I believe he meets WP:AUTHOR. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 14:28, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 04:45, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep as the nominator's stated concern can be fixed but Notability is clear on WP:AUTHOR having both coverage and WorldCat. SwisterTwister talk 06:15, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Jonathan Harchick

Jonathan Harchick (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Jonathan Harchick" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)
  • Comment The first nomination was over ten years ago in 2006. The 2nd nomination has been placed in 2017, so much has happened since then. -- AlexanderHovanec (talk) 20:30, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 04:50, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 04:51, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 04:58, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Strong keep; on the contrary, the 2006 discussion is absolutely irrelevant. Much has happend since then, and though most references cite YouTube, and though many projects take place there, I believe the subject is far more than a simple YouTuber. Counting to 100,000 (with proof) and being one of three people in history to do so is extremely notable. Not only that but he has uploaded the longest videos on YouTube, numerous times. Look it up and he's the first one to pop up. It's not easy and takes much rendering. Harchick has been featured on numerous news outlets for his achievements and I believe if someone were to come across one of his many projects, this'd be a beneficial and efficient "hub" that lists much of his doings nicely. The "wikia" that has been provided by SmokeyJoe is understandably added but not a good place to detail Harchick's deeds. It's very unreliable, unsourced, and poorly made. Notice how one out of the five bullets lists his "biggest fan", which is untrue, opinionated, and likely vandalism. In the past, Harchick was denied because, while he'd done some arguably impressive things with his career, he hadn't done anything significant. As of 2017 (just take a look at what has been in his current article:) he's done quite a bit. I say if Jonathan Mann meets the requirements for a Wikipedia article (and notice Mann also appears in the Harchick article), then Harchick himself should be denoted a Wikipedia detailing the highlights of his notable acts. I know "not just anyone can have a Wikipedia article", which has disputed for many people across the years, but I took this in to account and finally feel as if Harchick has done enough. He meets the guidelines, criteria, and policies of Wikipedia. While exceptions are made and in some cases, it's a stretch I also believe the following: it's unnecessary to deny Wikipedia of potential information. There's no harm done in keeping this article and its information around. All it's doing is adding to the knowledge contributed within Wikipedia's database, and expanding the topics it covers. Take someone on Instagram, a photographer perhaps, with 100,000 followers and write them up a Wikipedia — that is absolutely not okay. I understand that this doesn't and shouldn't occur. This scenario is not what's occuring. Harchick has done notable acts over the course of 10-11 years, as detailed in his current article and in turn should possess an article. -- AlexanderHovanec (talk) 05:08, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Upon rereading Joe's nomination request, I see that "reference bombing" is mentioned. That was not an intention and was completely accidental. When adding sources, it simply couldn't be decided which one was better so both were thrown in, which as a problem, wasn't considered. I'll see if I can pick out some notable sources.
Though I hope validity of sources isn't the main issue here. Because practically every article is indeed credible. -- AlexanderHovanec (talk) 05:10, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
One more thing to be considered; many of the references supplied were actually just used to prove certain chunks of information are true according to Harchick. For example, the fact that much of his YouTube accounts were deleted was detailed in a video of his. This specific citation was not provided to add to the credibility of the overall article but was simply provided to verify that individual statement. Other citations HAVE been provided to contribute to the overall article's credibility, though. -- AlexanderHovanec (talk) 05:13, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Those are proper uses of many supporting references. My wish is that people writing new articles would put the notability-attesting references in the first save. Then add further supporting references after. You put 26 references in on the first save. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:28, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Notability according to: WP:BIO and WP:Creative
* Has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment. Very unique contributions of which none other has attempted. Additionally, Vsauce claims at a panel that content by Harchick "wouldn't be found anywhere else". [1]
* The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series) or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews. Harchick was the subject of a Tosh.0 episode.
* The person's work (or works) either (a) has become a significant monument, (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums. Longest video on YouTube and one of three to count to 100,000.
* The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times. Though not recent, Harchick has won two local awards due to contributions sponsored by well-known Robert Morris University. They were won around the time of Harchick's first nomination for deletion and perhaps these awards were why an article was proposed in the first place. But like I said, a lot has happend since the first nomination. And in all technicality, the fact that awards were won do meet the requirements.
Alex, reference bombing is an unfortunate trend of all Wikipedia-spammers. It makes it very hard to review the notability-attesting sources. Notability should be demonstrated by a minimum or 2, no more than 3 sources. Independent, reliable (not amazon.com or youtube), secondary source (making commentary or analysis of the topic, and directly addressing the topic (the person Jonathan Harchick). Can you list these 2 or 3? --SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:23, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Of course reference bombing is unfortunate. I'd agree that it should be prevented. However I want to say that it was not intentional during this article's creation. And if it's any consolation, references can also be removed. For the sake of neutrality, did you attempt to find any notable sources, yourself?
Are the news outlets provided, like starring on The Today Show not be "credible"? I mean, I'd say they're certainly reliable and offer coverage on Harchick's notability quite nicely. Also, ABC News is a widely acclaimed news source, correct?
On the other hand, I'm aware that in the "filmography" section, many news outlets that Harchick's been featured on have not been cited in the article so perhaps I can uncover some. -- AlexanderHovanec (talk) 05:43, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Strong delete This is not the guiness book of world records. We do not create articles on people who do utterly pointless and meaningless things just to get attention for themselves. Considering that most of the sources are Youtube, and we should discount blog sources as well, there is a total lack of substantive coverage.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:28, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Strong keep (Counter) As stated numerous times, "getting attention for themselves" is not specified by the subject and is simply a rumor or estimate created by some of the media. No one can be sure the feats are simply for attention. It was even stated that the channels are hobbies done in the subjects spare time. "Utterly pointless and meaningless" are also heavily opinionated terms in which we try to avoid on Wikipedia. From a neutral point of view, it can be said that what the subject has done is indeed notable according to Wikipedia's criteria. Also stated numerous times, what would be your input on Jonathan Mann and his Wikipedia article? Are they not one in the same? And, sure, this is not a Guinness Book of World Records book, but notable tasks are indeed worth mentioning on the site. What are your thoughts on: List of people who have walked across the United States? Why do they receive an article? Sure the task takes a longer time to complete. Not only that, but a great amount of endurance. But proportions-of-achievement aside, large tasks that have "made a difference online"/"been a milestone online"/"been a notable event all around" are not only worth mentioning, but meet Wikipedia's criteria. Please refer to the bullets below.
Remember that notability according to: WP:BIO and WP:Creative states:
* Has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment. Very unique contributions of which none other has attempted. Additionally, Vsauce claims at a panel that content by Harchick "wouldn't be found anywhere else". [2]
* The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series) or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews. Harchick was the subject of a Tosh.0 episode.
* The person's work (or works) either (a) has become a significant monument, (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums. Longest video on YouTube and one of three to count to 100,000.
* The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times. Though not recent, Harchick has won two local awards due to contributions sponsored by well-known Robert Morris University. They were won around the time of Harchick's first nomination for deletion and perhaps these awards were why an article was proposed in the first place. But like I said, a lot has happend since the first nomination. And in all technicality, the fact that awards were won do meet the requirements.
Tasks completed by the subject have not only been 'Googled' countless times, but are also the first result to show up. It should be argued that his Wikipedia would be an efficient 'hub' for a recollection of all of his achievements for the ones who are truly interested.
-- AlexanderHovanec (talk) 16:25, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "New Creator Showcase Panel at Summer In The City". Ten Eighty Magazine. Retrieved November 12, 2017. 
  2. ^ "New Creator Showcase Panel at Summer In The City". Ten Eighty Magazine. Retrieved November 12, 2017. 
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein  11:33, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Amir Mir

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

No coverage in reliable sources. Fails WP:GNG. Störm (talk) 16:45, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

  • Keep I see a large footprint of news coverage of him as a journalist. He was also involved in an infamous 2014 incident [7][8] [9] [10] Mar4d (talk) 17:11, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
Sorry, but that falls under single event so violates WP policy. Störm (talk) 16:49, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 17:43, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 17:43, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 17:43, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:37, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete. Non-notable person. Fails GNG. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 01:58, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Sarfaraz Rajar

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

No coverage found. Fails WP:NPOL. Störm (talk) 16:43, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 17:43, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 17:43, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 17:43, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 17:45, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep Covered in various sources as a literary and political figure [11], besides book sources. Mar4d (talk) 09:16, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Fails because information is trivial. Störm (talk) 17:10, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:37, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Memon Abdul Majeed Sindh

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

No coverage in WP:RS. Indusian is in habit of creating such articles without reliable source. Fails WP:GNG. Störm (talk) 16:17, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 17:40, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 17:40, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 17:40, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete. The only hits on Google are a couple of mentions of his death in the Hindu Times' "on this day in history" column, plus a blog post. Not proven to be significantly notable ~dom Kaos~ (talk)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:42, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Weak keep. I don't feel like I'm in a position to evaluate the notability here because the literature in this field is likely to be in either Sindhi (a google search for the full name in Sindhi returns a high (for the context) number of hits) or in Urdu (I can't read either), and sources in English aren't generally likely to be found. And if any are found, as the previous comment testifies, then this is likely to be another indication of notability. And speaking of editors and their habits, the nom does appear to have one for nominating articles without seeming to appreciate the need for WP:BEFORE. – Uanfala 09:30, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
You may continue your inclusionism campaign. We here follow WP guidelines which requires every subject to be verified per WP:V in WP:RS and should pass WP:GNG. Burden is on the creator of the article to find Sindhi-language sources not on us to go to Sindh and find coverage in old papers. Störm (talk) 15:42, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein  17:00, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Naseer Ahmad Nasir

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

No coverage after his death. Fails WP:NWRITER. Störm (talk) 15:18, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 17:34, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 17:34, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 17:34, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 17:34, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 17:34, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein  16:59, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete. Non-notable person. Fails GNG. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 01:59, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Gary Morsch

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

BLP with no independent references Rathfelder (talk) 22:09, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 22:40, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment. The article already has a primary sources tag. There are some other sources discussing the subject: [12], [13], [14], [15], [16]. --Michig (talk) 07:12, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:23, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:11, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep in view of the multiple reliable sources identified above including news and book sources, passes WP:BASIC Atlantic306 (talk) 14:36, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Les Martin

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

Unable to find significant coverage to meet GNG nor do I believe the writing of tie-in novels meet NAUTHOR. J04n(talk page) 15:40, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. J04n(talk page) 15:40, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. J04n(talk page) 15:40, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Keep I have a two of his x-files books, he is a published author and should pass on WP:NAUTHOR. books on amazon. Govvy (talk) 21:34, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:41, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Comment: @User:Govvy, please explain which criterion of WP:NAUTHOR is met. J04n(talk page) 12:58, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

  • reply @J04n:, He is a published author, hmm, have they gone and changed NAUTHOR again? You use to qualify if you have published works. Govvy (talk) 13:48, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 06:00, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Ardit Bido

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

fails WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO the sources are essentially affiliated sources or sources that mention him in passing in articles about the national archives or simple appointment notices. Nothing of interest found in a WP:BEFORE search Domdeparis (talk) 09:20, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albania-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 09:23, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 09:23, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Keep There are plenty of reliable second sources regarding him. The fact that they are focused on his role in the national archives is quite normal per WP:ANYBIO, as long as that is the source of his nitability.Gezimmemishaj (talk) 10:08, 7 November 2017 (UTC) Gezimmemishaj (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Note Please do keep in mind that even major media outlets in Albania are not represented in google news or other related search engines. As such, it would be biased to be based on them for understanding the notability of Albanian notable persons.Gezimmemishaj (talk) 10:13, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
All BLP articles have to be sourced, I am not basing my deletion nomination solely on the lack of sources but as a national archive director it is unlikely that there will be in-depth coverage of this person. This is not the sort of public position that generates much coverage in any country that would go towards proving notability. So unless there are sources that prove his notability now then I don't believe that it is worth keeping the article in the hope that some will be found. Domdeparis (talk) 10:25, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
I saw that David Ferriero and Jeff James (public servant) notability comes precisely from their archives managing role. Both articles are less sourced than this one. And as I searched in google there are plenty of news articles regarding him probably every week. But, whatever, I do not care as it seems to be a bias against Albanians who are only notable in Albania (some days ago a page i created for the rector of the biggest university in albania was attacked for the same reasoning). The sources are plenty for this article so it is a string keep for me.Gezimmemishaj (talk) 11:12, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. North America1000 11:30, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
I agree with you about James and please feel free to nominate for deletion if you wish but Ferriero is a heavily sourced article and shows notability as per GNG. Please read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS as this is not a valid argument to use in a deletion debate. There is no bias against Albanians or any other nationality especially from my part. Please try and read WP:AGF and do not accuse me of bias without proof as this is a personal attack Domdeparis (talk) 11:59, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
Its not a personal attack. It is a bias of English Wikipedia against persons notable in countries where English is not spoken. The articles in Albanian are a depth coverage of his activities. The same as the rector that I wrote above. The fact that there is nothing in English does mean nothing.Gezimmemishaj (talk) 16:16, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
  • KEEP It is worthy to expand the article, and I added some material and plan to add more. Of course it is a noteworthy article, about a person who holds an important position and who is present in media in Albania frequently, as sources provide.Arditrada (talk) 13:00, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
It is not the frequency of the appearance of his name in media but the depth of coverage that is important. This is what is missing in this article. There are not enough in depth secondary coverage to pass WP:GNG. Domdeparis (talk) 13:12, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:06, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:35, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Galobtter (talkó tuó mió) 07:48, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete. I find the lack of independent sources disturbing. Astonishingly, an article written by a WP:SPA and supported by other WP:SPAs turns out to be more than a little promotional. I am shocked. Guy (Help!) 09:11, 21 November 2017 (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=770584231"
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