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

Koume-chan ga Iku!!

Koume-chan ga Iku!! (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Koume-chan ga Iku!!" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)
(Find sources: "小梅ちゃんが行く!!" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Contested PROD, fails WP:GNG. I was unable to find passing coverage in either English or Japanese sources. Winner 42 Talk to me! 01:28, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch 01:34, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete not a notable anime short series. There isn't even a Japanese Wikipedia article. ja:小梅ちゃんが行く The only thing it has going for it is that it exists in MADB [1] [2] AngusWOOF (barksniff) 01:41, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 01:43, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 01:43, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 01:43, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Caftan (Metropolitan Museum of Art)

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

No evidence that this individual object is notable - sources provided are from the museum which holds it. Wikipedia cannot hold descriptions of every museum collection item in the world. PROD was contested by the Wikimedian in Residence at the Museum. PamD 17:25, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

i agree we need a high bar for notibility on costume items in museums, but I believe this item may qualify if the article is expanded. Can you give me a few days to collect some research? - PKM (talk) 17:44, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
AfD discussion normally lasts at least a week. I can see the argument that a museum object can be notable in the same way as an individual painting in a gallery - but as you say there needs to be quite a high bar so that we don't get every museum catalogue dumped into the encyclopedia. Good luck in finding some independent sources to support this garment's notability. PamD 17:54, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
I have expanded the article significantly, and added references and many wikilinks. Let me know how you feel about these changes. -PKM (talk) 23:09, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment. I de-PROD'ed to allow a chance for discussion and further development, which seems to me appropriate. I don't think that we should have articles on every object in a museum collection, but this one does have a fair amount of scholarly WP:RS published on it, way beyond an entry in a museum catalogue. I'm not sure of what the answer ultimately should be, but I do think it's worth considering it as an art object, either by itself, or as part of a slightly broader cultural topic.--Pharos (talk) 18:12, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:56, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:56, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:56, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Archaeology-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:56, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Haruichi Furudate

Haruichi Furudate (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Haruichi Furudate" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)
(Find sources: "古舘春一" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Manga artist only known for the Haikyu series. As shown in the opening paragraph, manga artist has never attended any event, so notability independent of the series is difficult to assess. Recommend direct to Haikyu. JA Wikipedia shows some interviews but most are in the context of Haikyu. But this can be reviewed to see if that has enough for Furudate's notability. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 01:26, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 01:29, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 01:29, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 01:29, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 01:29, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 00:30, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J947(c) 20:05, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Markus Winter

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

Appears to lack significant coverage in reliable sources. It's possible that his gallery might be notable, but apart from the New York Times reference in the article (which is only a passing mention of him and is actually more about his gallery than himself), the references in the article are mostly about what's in his gallery rather than him specifically, or press releases. I couldn't find enough significant coverage actually about him. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:31, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:32, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:32, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:32, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete Agree with nominator; there is nothing substantial about the subject. What he sells may be notable, but he hasn't received significant critical attention himself. Mduvekot (talk) 14:03, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
3 articles in Die Welt and 2 NYTs that discuss him and his work should be considered sufficient for GNG, no? Agricola44 (talk) 15:54, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
The NYT pieces are not substantially about him, though. One sentence in [3]: "Markus Winter, the gallery’s owner, said that only a few of the show’s pieces have a clear provenance trail." [4]] quotes him and has "Marcus Winter, who organized the show with Brian Kish of the Brian Kish Gallery on Greene Street in SoHo, said it was the first about the architect in America." and "It took Mr. Winter almost two years to put the show together." Mduvekot (talk) 21:05, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
Actually, the 2004 NYT mentions him in several places. Importantly, it acknowledges i.e. notes him as an art historian ("Mr. Winter, an art historian from Düsseldorf, Germany") and it frames him as an authority by reporting his assessment on a historical matter ("'Ulrich was one of the last modern designers who cared about craftsmanship,' Mr. Winter said."). The 2 Die Welt articles have even more detail. Taken as a whole, these sources frame Winter as a recognized authority in this area of art history. Agricola44 (talk) 16:22, 10 May 2017 (UTC).
There is probably a legitimate case to be made that most of the claims in the article can be verified with as few as two or three of the sources. There is one piece in particular from Die Welt that has some biographical info that is not completely peripheral: this. For me, it's a bit too thin, considering the promotional tone of the sources by Andrea Hilgenstock (all the Zeit articles are by her), the lack of any support for Winter's status as an expert by real scholars in a relevant field in stead of newspaper editors, and the sudden appearance of User:Bennyflower whose very first contribution to Wikipedia was this !vote and User:Leonachtlicht, whose second edit to Wikipedia was to contest the speedy deletion nomination. There's something wrong with this article. It stretches my inclination to believe that all contributors to the article and this discussion are here to contribute in good faith without a conflict of interest beyond its limits. Of course, I'd be happy to revert my assertion if a satisfactory explanation for their sudden involvement can be provided by the two editors I mentioned. Mduvekot (talk) 00:20, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
There's no question of the SPA-nature of those 2 accts – I even tagged one of them as such. However, the salient debate is not about them, but about Winter. And, I also agree that there's no scholarly proof that he's an expert, but his opinion/work/gallery has undeniably appeared in Germany's main national daily...and, to me, this seems to be a textbook case of what we mean by GNG. I am the first to admit that GNG is blatantly and widely misused nowadays to shoehorn into WP local arts people having no relevance beyond their own town, but I don't think we'd be guilty of that here with material from NYT & Die Welt. Best, Agricola44 (talk) 01:12, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep His publications are referred to by all four major auction houses dealing in design: Sotheby's, Christie's, Phillips and Wright. His exhibitions are well reviewed not only by the New York Time but the Neue Zuericher Zeitung, Die Welt, Architectural Digest, Elle Decor and Vogue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leonachtlicht (talkcontribs)
  • Delete This seems like a promotional piece. Agree per nominator that subject is not non-notable. Netherzone (talk) 03:18, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 06:52, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 06:52, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 06:52, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep As a german design historian Markus Winter is of course a prominent person. He is one a few world wide leading experts in the field of pioneering design in the early 1900 to 1930ies in Germany and has made signifikant contributions to the relation and the worth of this design decade beside the German Bauhaus.He is currently working on the first documentation about that field and does a groundbreaking work for the understanding of the creative cultural forces in early 20th century Germany. It is not only an important part of design history, it is also a new view in cultural history and will alter the common view about how we looking to that very special period. So I prefer to hold the wikipedia source and think it also will be enhanced soon. NOT to be deleted! Bennyflower (talk) 20:09, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
Bennyflower (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Delete This is a promotional article that tried to fluff up a non-notable curator/historian/antiques dealer who has had a few passing mentions in good pubs. There simply isn't much there when you start scratching the surface, i.e. GNG is not satisfied for WP:Academic or any other criteria really. I had a closer look at the sources while converting four or five improper inline URLS to refs-- there is not much meat on these bones. Bennyflower and Leonachtlicht, the two keep votes, appear to be likely SPA's as well.198.58.162.149 (talk) 04:13, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep. Extensive piece in Die Welt and 2 NYT articles that discuss him and his work/gallery are enough for GNG. Agricola44 (talk) 15:45, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 12:34, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:NOTINHERITED. I agree that the keep !votes are not based on any actual Wikipedia policies (although I think SPA might be a bit far), and that although there has been much mention of the NYT articles, they only discuss Winter in the context of his gallery / exhibitions. They are not about he himself. Thus they are great sources for his gallery, etc., but poor for the individual. I cannot find sufficient independent third-party reliable sources to indicate depth or persistence of coverage at this time: [5] (blogs and zines, excluding the passing mentions). Fails WP:ANYBIO. — O Fortuna semper crescis, aut decrescis 12:57, 9 May 2017 (UTC).
Comment. WP:NOTINHERITED is usually interpreted to mean that a person isn't notable just because a relative is notable. It can also mean that some facet of a person's work isn't notable just because the person is notable. However, you're arguing the reverse here, that Winter isn't notable, even though his work has been widely noted. A person is notable if they've done notable work. And, for the record, the 2 NYTs do discuss his work, the Die Welt article discusses him and his work in detail, and there are at least 2 other Die Welt articles in the bib that discuss him and his work. You have to go through some pretty good mental gymnastics to argue that this sort of sourcing does not satisfy GNG. Agricola44 (talk) 15:49, 9 May 2017 (UTC).
It's also frequently used to argue against keeping articles of people who have merely collaborated with famous people without any in-depth coverage of their own work. In this case, that Markus Winter curated exhibitions with works from famous articles is not ipso facto proof of his notability. The fact that news organizations reported more on the famous artworks in the exhibitions and much less (if any) about Markus Winter's role, would militate against finding Winter notable in this case. Even if we accept that a curator is a creative professional and exhibitions are their works, it's unclear how Markus Winter would meet WP:CREATIVE without making every single curator who managed to successfully assemble an exhibition by notable artists themselves notable. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 06:41, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
Again, I'm not arguing his notability from a technical perspective. I'm pointing out the fact that several of the world's main news outlets, like NYT and Die Welt, have covered him, his work, his gallery, etc. on multiple occasions. This phenomenon, to have been noted, is indeed the crux of passing GNG. It's really that simple. You're arguing up a different tree, saying a book he wrote is not widely held and such. That may be true, but it's irrelevant. Cheers. Agricola44 (talk) 14:08, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete. Not convinced that the available sources demonstrate that Winter meets our notability guidelines. Also, using WorldCat, I was unable to find the first listed book, but the second one is held by three institutions [6], one of which, the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek, literally holds every modern German book published. The only other book I found in WorldCat was held four times. This does not seem like the output of notable art historian.---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 06:28, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete as neither the subject nor his work meet notability criteria. Ifnord (talk) 20:21, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
This discussion has developed pretty far beyond just making assertions. I still can't see any convincing justification that multiple articles in 2 national dailies do not satisfy GNG. Agricola44 (talk) 12:45, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 20:46, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep. He is the only source with significant stock of German expressionist furniture by architects such as Oskar Kaufmann, Fritz August Breuhaus and Leo Nachtlicht.Kidflave1 (talk) 17:18, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
Kidflave1 After your unsourced contribution to Markus Winter, your keep vote is your second contribution to Wikipedia. I have to wonder; how do you know that Winter "is the only source with significant stock of German expressionist furniture". That doesn't appear in any independent, reliable sources. Mduvekot (talk) 03:45, 22 May 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

Jennifer Reinfried

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

Doesn't meet WP:AUTHOR or WP:GNG Boleyn (talk) 21:24, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T/C) 21:40, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T/C) 21:40, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T/C) 21:40, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Rebecca Jaremko Bromwich

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

WP:BLP of a writer, academic and non-winning candidate for political office, which is written with a decidedly advertorial résumé slant and referenced entirely to primary sources with no evidence of reliable source coverage about her in media shown at all. As always, none of her three job titles confer an automatic notability freebie on a person just because she exists; she must be the subject of adequate reliable source coverage to pass WP:GNG, and the writing tone must be neutral and encyclopedic, for an article to become earned. Bearcat (talk) 03:23, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 11:36, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 11:36, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:06, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:06, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

This article is referenced. The comments below speak to potential benefits of editing the tone of the text, not to deleting the content. Deletion would be inappropriate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2620:22:4000:50B:1FFE:81A4:5913:5557 (talk) 19:38, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

2620:22:4000:50B:1FFE:81A4:5913:5557 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
The article is referenced to primary sources that cannot support notability in a Wikipedia article, not to any evidence of reliable source coverage about her in media. It takes the latter kind of sourcing, not the former, to get someone included on here. Bearcat (talk) 22:58, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete. Promo, almost entirely OR, with no acceptable sourcing, of a recently-minted PhD. The SPA account that created this article was unsuccessful in creating a companion article on the subject's husband...which matters only indirectly in that it suggests the either vanity or promotional purpose of the article. Agricola44 (talk) 20:53, 25 May 2017 (UTC).

Aïda Touré

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

Delete: as insufficiently notable poet, painter, composer; Google search turns up scant results; no valid reflinks. Quis separabit? 15:57, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 18:28, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 18:29, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 18:29, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 18:32, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep her art has been featured in US embassies[7]. Let's consult with French language Wikipedians who are more like to find coverage of her.--TM 16:28, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:36, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 04:29, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:42, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Marley Brant

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

Procedural nomination only. I declined this as a prod because it has previously been through AFD. Since the originally deleted article was completely unreferenced and this one actually has some sort of referencing, and is somewhat less promotional, I didn't feel I could delete it as a CSD G4 either. SpinningSpark 17:30, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:57, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:57, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete - Sorry, didn't see the prior AfD. The article originally had a claim that she was a grammy nominee, but that claim was sourced by a non-rs. Can't find any indication she was nominated. There are a couple of nice sources, but they both deal with a single one of her books, and the articles are more about the book than the author (Freebirds...). Absent that, does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NAUTHOR.Onel5969 TT me 20:18, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 20:53, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Shin Mi-na

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

Article on not-notable person has been previously CSD'ed and immediately recreated. Recommend delete and salt. Chetsford (talk) 15:00, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 17:12, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of South Korea-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 17:13, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:22, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:22, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Winged Blades Godric 03:16, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment. The sources seem almost entirely in Korean, but the two linked in the article seem like reputable papers, and may have in-depth coverage. I think we could use an opinion from a Korean speaker. I do think there may be a celebrity-person with a similar name that may be generating extra hits, so approach this carefully. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:20, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Prayash Gupta

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

Not yet notable per WP:NAUTHOR or WP:BIO. All sources are WP:Primary, with no evidence from the references here of their work having been published in notable dailies; awards listed are vanity awards, one of which is referenced only by an empty entry on the subject's blog; no significant coverage online in WP:Reliable sources. Evident WP:Conflict of interest by article creator. Proposed deletion contested by article creator. Uncle Roy (talk) 06:36, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Uncle Roy (talk) 06:36, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Uncle Roy (talk) 06:36, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Daniel Sekulich

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

WP:BLP of a writer and filmmaker, who has potentially valid claims of notability but isn't reliably sourcing them. Of the four sources present here, all four represent classes of sourcing that cannot be used to establish notability: a Q&A interview on a blog, a primary source "staff" profile on the website of a radio show with which he has a direct affiliation, a piece of media content in which he's the bylined author and not the subject, and a piece of media content which glancingly namechecks his existence but is not about him. And on a Google News search, he gets just four hits not already cited here, all of which are also bylines or namechecks rather than coverage about him. As always, neither filmmakers nor writers are automatically entitled to Wikipedia articles just because they exist; they must be the subject of enough media coverage to clear WP:GNG for a Wikipedia article to become earned. Bearcat (talk) 15:06, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Strong Keep - notable enough for ABC News to interview him as a "piracy expert". I reviewed this brand spanking new BLP, did a bit of online research before I gave it a green-go, and as you stated above, the potential is there. Unfortunately, I didn't have time to dig for more because we're trying to catch-up on a growing backlog at NPR, and I'm currently in transit internationally, so my time is limited. Bearcat, just curious - did you try to find any sources that would establish his notability, or did you feel that because the cited sources didn't pass that it was best to delete the article? Perhaps it should've gone to the article TP first? I came across a few other articles with questionable notability - not even with the potential of this BLP - and they survived AfD. Atsme📞📧 18:28, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
For starters being the interview guest does not assist notability at all, because if he's talking about something other than himself then he fails to be the subject of that coverage. The only kind of source that can assist notability at all is where a reliable source is publishing or broadcasting content in which other people are writing or speaking about him in the third person. And secondly, as my nomination statement already plainly demonstrates, I did undertake a search for the necessary type of sourcing — but I came up completely dry for anything at all. Bearcat (talk) 18:46, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
Addional sources have been added, and there are more but I'm comfortable with what's there now as having satisfied N. He clearly meets N as a "creative professional" (filmmaker, director, author, expert on piracy, etc.) PBS programs/specials don't always get the kind of media attention as would a major network series or specials.) Atsme📞📧 19:35, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
Except that the new sources you added are virtually all still either primary sources or glancing namechecks of his existence in coverage of other things. The only one that counts for anything at all toward getting him over WP:GNG is in his hometown newspaper — but one piece of media coverage is not enough to claim GNG all by itself, and it doesn't support anything that would constitute an automatic pass of any SNG. His hometown newspaper might very well still have covered him if his only claim of notability was "owns a coffeeshop at the corner of Wellington and Pim", so the fact that one article exists in his hometown newspaper is not a GNG pass in and of itself. Wikipedia's inclusion criteria hinge entirely on the sourceability or lack thereof, not on mere existence — creative professionals do not get an automatic inclusion freebie just because their work exists, so the fact that "PBS programs/specials don't always get the kind of media attention as would a major network series or specials" does not exempt him from having to pass GNG just because one of his films aired as a PBS special. His includability depends entirely on media coverage about him, and the sourcing here just isn't showing that he passes that test. Bearcat (talk) 12:14, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Your arguments for deletion are contradicted by WP:N and the reasons follow:
  1. You stated: "His includability depends entirely on media coverage about him, and the sourcing here just isn't showing that he passes that test." Please see the ABC News article which is hardly trivial mention about Sekulich's expertise on piracy, and his book "Terror on the Seas: True Tales of Modern Pirates." One of the sections begins "Sekulich has little sympathy for the plight of the pirates, and he doesn't exactly buy their tale of losing the fishing industry or their claims about rampant pollution from outside ships." There's also the Variety review about the film Sekulich directed, Aftermath: The Remnants of War, which further serves as verifiability in an independent RS and includes information about him, such as "Helmer Daniel Sekulich follows the grim work of Valery Shtrykov, who is trying to identify and reclaim the remains of the battle’s dead, both Russian and German." Hotnews.ro, is an international news source that was cited in the article, and it states: "Piracy is today a multinational entity that produces billions of dollars of income and affects the security of the global economy," says Daniel Sekulich, a Canadian journalist who has been pursuing the phenomenon of global piracy for years. What is Pirateria SRL, which are the most dangerous oceans, why some of the pirates believe modern Robin Hood and how to manage some people in tiny boats and boats to capture thousands of tons of superpowers, Sekulich tells us in an interview with HotNews .com.." When major news sources are writing articles and interviewing a person about their work, and consider them an expert in their field, WP:GNG considers the personal notable. Being notable is not the same as being famous. When you stack the multiple sources about Sekulich and his work, it's rather obvious that he passes GNG.
  2. You stated: "Wikipedia's inclusion criteria hinge entirely on the sourceability or lack thereof, not on mere existence." Well, WP:NPOSSIBLE disagrees, and specifically states (my bold): Thus, before proposing or nominating an article for deletion, or offering an opinion based on notability in a deletion discussion, editors are strongly encouraged to attempt to find sources for the subject in question and consider the possibility of existent sources if none can be found by a search. Wikipedia articles are not a final draft, and an article's subject can be notable if such sources exist, even if they have not been named yet. If it is likely that significant coverage in independent sources can be found for a topic, deletion due to lack of notability is inappropriate. Look again at what editors have already sourced with limited searching.
  3. You even agreed in your deletion request: "who has potentially valid claims of notability but isn't reliably sourcing them.". Sekulich is a new article created 10 May 2017, and should not be deleted if we're following WP:PAG.
Again, it's rather obvious that he easily passes GNG based WP:CREATIVE and RS media coverage to satisfy verifiability including ABC News, Variety, Hot News.ro, and local media such as Sault Star. I'm changing my position to Strong Keep. Atsme📞📧 15:32, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
1) A person gets a Wikipedia article by being the subject of the sources, not by being one of several soundbite-givers in an article whose subject is a topic that is not him. The ABC News article falls in the class of "glancing namechecks of his existence", which is not a class of sourcing that assists in showing notability. Variety also namechecks his existence, but is about the film rather than him. HotNews.ro is not a reliable source at all, so it counts for nothing. And the Sault Star is local coverage in his own hometown, in which again he's providing commentary on an issue rather than being the subject of the coverage. So the ABC News, Variety and Sault Star sources would be acceptable for supplementary sourcing of stray facts within a mix of much more solid sourcing than the article is showing — but none of them is substantively enough about him to bring the GNG in and of itself.
2) You're misreading what that criterion means. The possibility of improved sourceability existing despite one's own lack of finding viable sources on a search does not create a blanket exemption from an article having to be sourced properly — and it pertains mainly to historical topics who might not turn up much in Google searches because they didn't get media coverage during the era when that media coverage was reliably locatable on the web. If he'd lived and worked and died 100 years ago, then one would have to dig deeper into news retrieval databases before going ahead with a nomination, because 100-year-old media coverage won't Google properly. But for a person who is currently active in his field and producing current work, Google is a reliable judge of whether the necessary level of sourcing exists or not — for a contemporary topic in the era when all media coverage that exists at all is always web-accessible in some form, it's quite literally impossible for any valid sourcing to somehow still exist outside of the ability to locate it via a Google search.
3) Notability criteria are not passed just because their passage has been asserted — lots of self-promoting wannabes try to get Wikipedia articles for publicity purposes by hyping their notability claim past the actual or sourceable reality of the situation (e.g. a musician falsely claiming to have achieved a higher chart position in Billboard than he ever actually did, a writer claiming to have been "nominated" for a major literary award for which she never actually made the shortlist just because her book was submitted by its publisher for consideration, a filmmaker PR-bumfing himself as "award-winning" without actually naming or sourcing what awards he won, etc.) So the mere claim to passing a notability criterion does not constitute a notability freebie that exempts a person from having to have a WP:GNG-satisfying level of reliable source coverage — the claim still has to be supported by a stronger volume of coverage than anything that's been shown here. Bearcat (talk) 15:57, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep, Notable journalist and award winning film maker. One of his films picked up 9 awards. Quoted and referred to in many books relating to various issues. Easy keep for me, but I have to point out that the page needs some improvement here and there and a bit of a tidy and re-arrange. Karl Twist (talk) 09:21, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Firstly, what properly sourced evidence is there of his winning any award notable enough to confer an automatic WP:CREATIVE pass because award? This article, as written, claims no award wins at all — it claims one honourable mention for a non-notable literary award, and one nomination for an award at a local film festival, neither of which is grounds for a CREATIVE pass. For a nomination to be enough in and of itself to get a person into Wikipedia, the award has to be on the elite level of the Oscars or the BAFTAs — and outside of the elite Cannes-Berlin-TIFF-Sundance tier of film festivals (which Hot Docs is not in), even a win of a film festival award still wouldn't confer an automatic CREATIVE pass in the absence of a demonstrated GNG pass. And his IMDb profile lists no awards at all either — literally the only sourcing I can find for his winning any award at all, let alone any award that would actually be notable enough to constitute a valid notability claim in a Wikipedia article, is his own self-published elevator pitch about being "award-winning".
Secondly, a person gets a Wikipedia article by being the subject of reliable source coverage, not by being "quoted" or "referred to" in coverage of other things that aren't him. But nobody's shown any evidence that he's the subject of any degree of reliable source coverage — this is based almost entirely on primary sources and glancing namechecks of his existence in coverage of other things, not on coverage which has him as its subject. Bearcat (talk) 15:57, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:59, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:59, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:59, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:59, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Winged Blades Godric 03:37, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
  • strong keep surely he meets WP:CREATIVE according to the third criterion, "The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work [...] In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of an independent and notable work [...] or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews [emphasis added]." Clearly his documentaries have been the primary subject of multiple articles AND reviews, whether or not these are cited in the article in its current form. Newimpartial (talk) 07:58, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep career as a journalist and author are readily source-able, (WP:NOTCLEANUP]]; both books got come media coverage, especially the second book (pirate!). Serious journalist, respected writer, patent notability.E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:34, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Jim Templeton

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

While there is a ton of coverage on folks with this name, none seem to be about this particular person. It was a redirect to an article about a photograph which gained some notoriety. This person does not appear to meet either WP:GNG or WP:NCREATIVE. Onel5969 TT me 15:49, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 21:04, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 21:04, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 21:04, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 21:06, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Greg McLaren

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

fails WP:CREATIVE. suspiciously created by a single purpose editor of the same name as article. No awards , no notable publications LibStar (talk) 12:06, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Jupitus Smart 15:18, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Weak keep My initial search seems to indicate a non trivial amount of and rather varied references to this subject, even though not of the outstanding type. There does appear to be sufficient to support a more in depth article and a better referenced one. Agree that there are no awards, etc., that I can see at the moment, but the subject just needs to pass WP:GNG, and WP:BLP, not any specific SNG. At the moment I am going with WP:NEXIST. So what if it was originally created by an SPA as an autobio. If it passes GNG, is verifialbe, and is NPOV, then it can stay. Aoziwe (talk) 06:49, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 23:49, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:06, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:10, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Colleen Patrick-Goudreau

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

I can't find RS's so it appears to not meet the notability criteria. Utsill (talk) 02:08, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 02:25, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 02:25, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 06:01, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 06:01, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 06:02, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep She passes under CREATIVE for the reviews of her work. I've added the information to the article and cleaned it up. I hope Utsill will take another look. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:33, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
The article looks better now, but could you be more specific in which reviews you think qualify her as WP:CREATIVE and which criteria she falls under? I see she has been mentioned in NPR and HuffPo, but those are commentaries, not RS's, i.e. news coverage. See WP:NEWSORG.The Boston Globe ref seems to just be a passing mention for an event blurb. Utsill (talk) 12:28, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep The scope of her published works and the reliable and verifiable sources provided meet the notability standard. Alansohn (talk) 11:46, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
Could you be more specific? My current impression is that it has not "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject," see WP:NOTABILITY. Utsill (talk) 12:29, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 16:00, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep enough coverage in reliable sources Atlantic306 (talk) 17:07, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
I'm still waiting for someone to justify this view. Where is the significant coverage in RS's? Utsill (talk) 20:01, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Chidera Okolie

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

Same notability issues as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chidera Okolie, two years later. Possible COI. Contested PROD.   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 07:01, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions.   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 07:38, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 07:38, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

delete; the general lack of awards and connections that themselves have articles suggests that this BPL is, even two years later, still too soon. —jameslucas ▄▄▄ ▄ ▄▄▄ ▄▄▄ ▄ 10:35, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 12:51, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:48, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep. The page needs massive clean-up, but it is clear that she has received both awards and press. I made a start, but unfortunately in addition to the repetitive organization, the article creator had big problems with the citation templates and the source sites are unusually rife with pop-ups and in some cases are republishing others' words, so it will take a while to impose order on the article. But some of the references are under-used and appear to be reliable enough. Yngvadottir (talk) 23:14, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep as she has won a number of awards and the article is being cleaned up and improvedAtlantic306 (talk) 17:33, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep She is well known in Nigeria and though the creator did a near terrible job at his use of templates and irrelevant and duplicate references, the page had been improved. She has won a coupe of awards too. Some of the references, though bereft of international recognition, still prove she is exists as a Nigerian award winning author. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.159.127.196 (talk) 23:02, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
169.159.127.196 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 12:44, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
@Jeff G. i do believe it is sock puppetry at work as they all sound alike and are of similar thought process.Celestina007 (talk) 21:14, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
@Celestina007: Yes, given that the article was authored, edited, and defended by a sockmaster, two sockpuppets, and a block evading IP address in the subject's country which is probably the sockmaster (Bbb23 may want to weigh in on that). I concur that the article: fails WP:AUTHOR, WP:GNG, WP:BASIC, and WP:INDEPTH; and is WP:TOOSOON.   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 10:05, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

*Keep Unfortunately, I don't know how Wikipedia works. I only come here to read articles but never thought of signing up. I was directed here when I tried to buy her book on Amazon by typing her name in on Google. My name is Chioma, I am Nigerian. I can tell you I am utterly surprised she has been included in a deletion page as the lady in question is a recognized author in Nigeria. She was even recognized by Guinness as one of the made of black heroines and has been endorsed by our ex president. Please do well to search her identity and profile on Google search. I think the references herein are not doing her justice and the creator of her page should kindly make the list longer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChiomaNika (talkcontribs) 23:17, 17 May 2017 (UTC) Keep My bad, I should have done my research properly before creating the page. I will heed to your suggestions and corrections. This however should not be a ground for delete. The idea is to recognize people carving niches and that is why I thought she deserved a page on Wiki. Yngvadottir Atlantic306 ChiomaNikathank you. All noted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MirabelIkwuebe (talkcontribs) 00:40, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

  • Strong delete as per what @JamesLucas said & article generally falls short of primary notability guidelines such as WP:BASIC & in her respect as an "Author" it/she fails woefully in WP:AUTHOR a case of WP:TOOSOON a policy very alien to new editors Celestina007 (talk) 02:06, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
  •  CheckUser note: ChiomaNika is a  Confirmed sock of MirabelIkwuebe.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:21, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete Aside the awards, I don not think the subject satisfies WP:GNG and I see this as a case of TOOSOON. The subject and her book have not been discussed in details on independent reliable sources per WP:INDEPTH.—Oluwa2Chainz »» (talk to me) 15:29, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment The awards surely are a sign of notability? In any case, I suggest we should consider cutting some slack here for someone working in a country where there are fewer available online news sources than in, say, the US or Australia. We should be wary of possible bias. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:51, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
@Yngvadottir Your theory, although slightly plausible does not apply here, as this article is written in a time when information technology is readily available and when reliable sources are in excess on the internet for Nigerians who are truly notable, if you asked me to defend that which i just stated by providing articles on Nigerians which contain a decent amount of reliable sources; the list would be countless. There are even articles on notable Nigerians who lived before the country receiced thier independence (1960) and these articles are really sound and furnished with numerous reliable sources so what then is the excuse of an article or its subject for lacking significant coverage in reliable sources when it is being written in this modern time? it's a simple thing really, WP:TOOSOON is the problem here and furthermore let it not elude our thinking that this is a WP:BLP and we know how important it is to wikipedia, so lets be sure to follow polices and guidelines to the core, furthermore as per WP:CRYSTALBALL we need references and sources to work here and in the event the two aforementioned requisites are not presented it is just too soon for the subject to own a stand-alone article Celestina007 (talk) 20:57, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
You keep saying that; clearly we disagree about evaluating the sources. But I really don't think there's a BLP issue; the article is based entirely on the sources and contains nothing negative. Remember, the encyclopedia has plenty of room; including this writer does not mean we have to exclude anyone else. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:08, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Your arguement is plausible (i do not dispute that) then again it comes to mind that it took a sock puppet with 3 accounts to assemble this page. i know good Nigerian editors (including @Oluwa2Chainz that !voted a delete) that take note of notable Nigerians and create their BLP's, but rather it took sock puppets in this case. Tell me that doesnt tell you something? @Yngvadottir || Celestina007 (talk) 20:57, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
I can't entirely follow your logic there. The page was created by MirabelIkwuebe; I see only two minor edits by ChiomaNika (and I put a lot of work into cleaning up the page; I would attribute most of its deficiencies to MirabelIkwuebe's being new). In any case, if they are the same person, how does it indicate difficulty of finding sources if they edited the article under more than one identity? I also think it was unduly harsh to strike out MirabelIkwuebe's !vote here as well as that of the sock. The problem with sock participation in discussions is giving the impression of multiple people sharing an opinion; she still has a right to express that opinion once. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:23, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 16:42, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep "Fiction Writer of the Year at the Nigerian Writers Awards" seems sufficient for the presumption of keeping the article, and [8] shows that isn't a hoax. Power~enwiki (talk) 19:05, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Weak keep: I agree with you that reliable source exist for Nigerians who are truly notable in the last few years, but the key word is that she is a writer. Based on GNG alone, if she was an actress, singer, sportperson, footballer, etc. I would have voted delete easily. I'm certain there are not up to five Nigerian-based female writers on Wikipedia. The point I'm making is that even though internet resources are now prevalent in Nigeria, there is still in a knowledge gap when you consider the areas being covered, and writers and novelist is one of such. I am not saying we should go against policy but we can not overlook her awards and being listed as one of the prominent Nigerian writers. In addition to the sources in the article, I found the following that show that she is still being covered by reliable sources in 2017. 1, 2. Darreg (talk) 19:47, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Evi Martyn

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

I've asked at both the Music and Classical Music project talk pages but no-one is stepping forward. There is a distinct aura of this person failing to satisfy WP:GNG. The few sources I have found, in addition to those stated, are passing mentions in adverts for performances etc. The proviso may be significant: I do not have access to many US newspaper sources. Sitush (talk) 23:58, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 02:01, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Greece-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 02:01, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:38, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:38, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:38, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:38, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Weak keep I found http://www.presstelegram.com/general-news/20070820/lifes-work-honored, three paragraphs in http://www.nytimes.com/1983/01/30/arts/music-debuts-in-review-197184.html, which is also listed in the article, and a brief mention at http://articles.latimes.com/1987-09-09/news/vw-4493_1_piano-dealer. She's certainly not Vladimir Horowitz, Alfred Brendel or a more well known pianist, but there's just enough there to satisfy. If the claim that she was was induced into the Hall of Fame of the American College of Musicians in 1989, then it would be clear. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:26, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:29, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
  • We do not seem to have an article for the American College of Musicians, which is surprising if they are an award-giving body of note(sic). Thus, any award from them probably doesn't mean much. As I said in my nomination, the mentions in sources appear to be passing remarks at best and that is illustrated by your links. Such stuff doesn't confer notability and your first (the Press Telegram) is an obvious press release and is referring to mentions in versions of Marquis's Who's Who that, I think, are paid entries. At least, that what the folks at WP:RSN have said and it is why they are not considered to be reliable sources. - Sitush (talk) 07:27, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Actually, for the Who's Who stuff, see for example Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_56#Who.27s_Who_not_RS.3F. It's a vanity thing and it looks like the selection bar may be low. - Sitush (talk) 07:34, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 04:31, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment In addition to the above, please also note that the main contributor to the article is Hybridmorphos, who has edited literally nothing but this thing in all their time here, and have done so as recently as last week. It really does look like a small attempt at promotion. - Sitush (talk) 07:27, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Emunah La-Paz

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

Because PROD was removed without any significant changes, we are here. This writer is not noted in any significant reliable coverage. Blogs and passing mentions are all that could be found. Note, the author has an obvious COI with the subject.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 18:26, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:54, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:54, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Alabama-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 18:55, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 19:09, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete - Page reads like a puff piece and subject is far from being notable. Meatsgains (talk) 19:20, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep - I've found a few online resources that I think are notable. Creator has a clear COI but I'll try to edit/update the page. User:Rtt11 (talk) 18:15, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment Page is a mess, but I did find 1 review in an RS: Kirkus on Memoir of a Jaded Woman. I have the feeling she may be TOOSOON. However, if Rtt11 finds more, ping me and I'll !vote. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:19, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment I'm continuing to work on the page and am continuing to look for credible sources. It can be difficult because articles switch between her name and her pen name, but I've managed to clean the page up a significant amount. I do believe she is notable enough to have a page (even though the initial publish was a MESS), and I'm willing to continue working on it. User:Rtt11 (talk) 00:11, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 21:25, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 03:51, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment - I've significantly revised the page since the first deletion notice and could appreciate any help/advice - are the sources reliable enough? Should I get rid of anything? I do think she qualifies enough to be kept (although I'm newer to Wiki) and I think Wikipedia could use more articles on women authors, so it's my hope that I've done enough. Rtt11talk 21:09, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Markus Winter

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

Appears to lack significant coverage in reliable sources. It's possible that his gallery might be notable, but apart from the New York Times reference in the article (which is only a passing mention of him and is actually more about his gallery than himself), the references in the article are mostly about what's in his gallery rather than him specifically, or press releases. I couldn't find enough significant coverage actually about him. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:31, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:32, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:32, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:32, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete Agree with nominator; there is nothing substantial about the subject. What he sells may be notable, but he hasn't received significant critical attention himself. Mduvekot (talk) 14:03, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
3 articles in Die Welt and 2 NYTs that discuss him and his work should be considered sufficient for GNG, no? Agricola44 (talk) 15:54, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
The NYT pieces are not substantially about him, though. One sentence in [9]: "Markus Winter, the gallery’s owner, said that only a few of the show’s pieces have a clear provenance trail." [10]] quotes him and has "Marcus Winter, who organized the show with Brian Kish of the Brian Kish Gallery on Greene Street in SoHo, said it was the first about the architect in America." and "It took Mr. Winter almost two years to put the show together." Mduvekot (talk) 21:05, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
Actually, the 2004 NYT mentions him in several places. Importantly, it acknowledges i.e. notes him as an art historian ("Mr. Winter, an art historian from Düsseldorf, Germany") and it frames him as an authority by reporting his assessment on a historical matter ("'Ulrich was one of the last modern designers who cared about craftsmanship,' Mr. Winter said."). The 2 Die Welt articles have even more detail. Taken as a whole, these sources frame Winter as a recognized authority in this area of art history. Agricola44 (talk) 16:22, 10 May 2017 (UTC).
There is probably a legitimate case to be made that most of the claims in the article can be verified with as few as two or three of the sources. There is one piece in particular from Die Welt that has some biographical info that is not completely peripheral: this. For me, it's a bit too thin, considering the promotional tone of the sources by Andrea Hilgenstock (all the Zeit articles are by her), the lack of any support for Winter's status as an expert by real scholars in a relevant field in stead of newspaper editors, and the sudden appearance of User:Bennyflower whose very first contribution to Wikipedia was this !vote and User:Leonachtlicht, whose second edit to Wikipedia was to contest the speedy deletion nomination. There's something wrong with this article. It stretches my inclination to believe that all contributors to the article and this discussion are here to contribute in good faith without a conflict of interest beyond its limits. Of course, I'd be happy to revert my assertion if a satisfactory explanation for their sudden involvement can be provided by the two editors I mentioned. Mduvekot (talk) 00:20, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
There's no question of the SPA-nature of those 2 accts – I even tagged one of them as such. However, the salient debate is not about them, but about Winter. And, I also agree that there's no scholarly proof that he's an expert, but his opinion/work/gallery has undeniably appeared in Germany's main national daily...and, to me, this seems to be a textbook case of what we mean by GNG. I am the first to admit that GNG is blatantly and widely misused nowadays to shoehorn into WP local arts people having no relevance beyond their own town, but I don't think we'd be guilty of that here with material from NYT & Die Welt. Best, Agricola44 (talk) 01:12, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep His publications are referred to by all four major auction houses dealing in design: Sotheby's, Christie's, Phillips and Wright. His exhibitions are well reviewed not only by the New York Time but the Neue Zuericher Zeitung, Die Welt, Architectural Digest, Elle Decor and Vogue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leonachtlicht (talkcontribs)
  • Delete This seems like a promotional piece. Agree per nominator that subject is not non-notable. Netherzone (talk) 03:18, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 06:52, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 06:52, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 06:52, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep As a german design historian Markus Winter is of course a prominent person. He is one a few world wide leading experts in the field of pioneering design in the early 1900 to 1930ies in Germany and has made signifikant contributions to the relation and the worth of this design decade beside the German Bauhaus.He is currently working on the first documentation about that field and does a groundbreaking work for the understanding of the creative cultural forces in early 20th century Germany. It is not only an important part of design history, it is also a new view in cultural history and will alter the common view about how we looking to that very special period. So I prefer to hold the wikipedia source and think it also will be enhanced soon. NOT to be deleted! Bennyflower (talk) 20:09, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
Bennyflower (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Delete This is a promotional article that tried to fluff up a non-notable curator/historian/antiques dealer who has had a few passing mentions in good pubs. There simply isn't much there when you start scratching the surface, i.e. GNG is not satisfied for WP:Academic or any other criteria really. I had a closer look at the sources while converting four or five improper inline URLS to refs-- there is not much meat on these bones. Bennyflower and Leonachtlicht, the two keep votes, appear to be likely SPA's as well.198.58.162.149 (talk) 04:13, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep. Extensive piece in Die Welt and 2 NYT articles that discuss him and his work/gallery are enough for GNG. Agricola44 (talk) 15:45, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 12:34, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:NOTINHERITED. I agree that the keep !votes are not based on any actual Wikipedia policies (although I think SPA might be a bit far), and that although there has been much mention of the NYT articles, they only discuss Winter in the context of his gallery / exhibitions. They are not about he himself. Thus they are great sources for his gallery, etc., but poor for the individual. I cannot find sufficient independent third-party reliable sources to indicate depth or persistence of coverage at this time: [11] (blogs and zines, excluding the passing mentions). Fails WP:ANYBIO. — O Fortuna semper crescis, aut decrescis 12:57, 9 May 2017 (UTC).
Comment. WP:NOTINHERITED is usually interpreted to mean that a person isn't notable just because a relative is notable. It can also mean that some facet of a person's work isn't notable just because the person is notable. However, you're arguing the reverse here, that Winter isn't notable, even though his work has been widely noted. A person is notable if they've done notable work. And, for the record, the 2 NYTs do discuss his work, the Die Welt article discusses him and his work in detail, and there are at least 2 other Die Welt articles in the bib that discuss him and his work. You have to go through some pretty good mental gymnastics to argue that this sort of sourcing does not satisfy GNG. Agricola44 (talk) 15:49, 9 May 2017 (UTC).
It's also frequently used to argue against keeping articles of people who have merely collaborated with famous people without any in-depth coverage of their own work. In this case, that Markus Winter curated exhibitions with works from famous articles is not ipso facto proof of his notability. The fact that news organizations reported more on the famous artworks in the exhibitions and much less (if any) about Markus Winter's role, would militate against finding Winter notable in this case. Even if we accept that a curator is a creative professional and exhibitions are their works, it's unclear how Markus Winter would meet WP:CREATIVE without making every single curator who managed to successfully assemble an exhibition by notable artists themselves notable. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 06:41, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
Again, I'm not arguing his notability from a technical perspective. I'm pointing out the fact that several of the world's main news outlets, like NYT and Die Welt, have covered him, his work, his gallery, etc. on multiple occasions. This phenomenon, to have been noted, is indeed the crux of passing GNG. It's really that simple. You're arguing up a different tree, saying a book he wrote is not widely held and such. That may be true, but it's irrelevant. Cheers. Agricola44 (talk) 14:08, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete. Not convinced that the available sources demonstrate that Winter meets our notability guidelines. Also, using WorldCat, I was unable to find the first listed book, but the second one is held by three institutions [12], one of which, the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek, literally holds every modern German book published. The only other book I found in WorldCat was held four times. This does not seem like the output of notable art historian.---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 06:28, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete as neither the subject nor his work meet notability criteria. Ifnord (talk) 20:21, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
This discussion has developed pretty far beyond just making assertions. I still can't see any convincing justification that multiple articles in 2 national dailies do not satisfy GNG. Agricola44 (talk) 12:45, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 20:46, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep. He is the only source with significant stock of German expressionist furniture by architects such as Oskar Kaufmann, Fritz August Breuhaus and Leo Nachtlicht.Kidflave1 (talk) 17:18, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
Kidflave1 After your unsourced contribution to Markus Winter, your keep vote is your second contribution to Wikipedia. I have to wonder; how do you know that Winter "is the only source with significant stock of German expressionist furniture". That doesn't appear in any independent, reliable sources. Mduvekot (talk) 03:45, 22 May 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