Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Arts and entertainment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
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[edit]

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

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

Tagging articles[edit]

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

Members[edit]

  1. come help with the Bronwen Mantel article Smith Jones 22:16, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
  2. Lovelaughterlife (talk · contribs) Worked extensively on some biographies; reverted vandalism some others
  3. Francoisalex2 (talk · contribs)
  4. Dovebyrd (talk · contribs)
  5. Artventure22 (talk · contribs)
  6. Truth in Comedy (talk · contribs)
  7. Warlordjohncarter (talk · contribs)
  8. DENAMAX (talk · contribs) Maxim Stoyalov
  9. Ozgod (talk · contribs)
  10. Eremeyv (talk · contribs)
  11. Susanlesch (talk · contribs), mostly inactive
  12. EraserGirl (talk) 03:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
  13. Shruti14 (talk · contribs) will help when I can
  14. Jubileeclipman (talk · contribs) I am interested in taking on UK celebrities with articles that are stubs or otherwise non-standard. Entirely rewrote Fearne Cotton to raise standard and remove fansite tag. I am working on Holly Willoughby which was merely a list plus trivia. Will also work on musicians, all genre, living or dead.
  15. Jarhed (talk · contribs) 21:01, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
  16. Mvzix (talk · contribs)
  17. Cassianto (talk · contribs)
  18. Iamthecheese44 (talk · contribs)
  19. Georgiasouthernlynn (talk · contribs)
  20. Fitindia (talk · contribs)
  21. BabbaQ (talk · contribs)
  22. Woodstop45 (talk · contribs)
  23. Willthacheerleader18 (talk · contribs)

General[edit]

Infoboxes[edit]

Requested articles[edit]

Actors[edit]

Architects[edit]

Click the "►" below to see all subcategories:

Sanwal sharma

Illustrators[edit]

Click the "►" below to see all subcategories:

Painters[edit]

Click the "►" below to see all subcategories:

Photographers[edit]

Click the "►" below to see all subcategories:

Sculptors[edit]

Click the "►" below to see all subcategories:

Comics artists[edit]

Click the "►" below to see all subcategories:

Visual arts deletions[edit]

Visual arts deletion sorting discussions

Visual arts[edit]

Patti Pavilion[edit]

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

This is another no reference article on a theater in Swansea. Third party searches found nothing on the venue, so it possibly fails WP:NBUILD.

Plus to my knowledge the venue is just a hall attached to a restaurant. I had been to the location and it certainly doesn't look notable enough to pass the cultural heritage requirement. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:26, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Tagging it with school as exams are sometimes taken at this venue. --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:31, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Similiar AFDs:

notices about deletion sorting
:Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:28, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:28, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Theatre-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:28, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:28, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:28, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:28, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:28, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wales-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:28, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep there are lots of mentions in good publications in adequate depth to see that this is a well-known historical building in Swansea. The more recent BBC article that runs down its history and future gives a good sense of the story of the building. I added eight references. 96.127.244.27 (talk) 00:41, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep now expanded, for which thanks. Johnbod (talk) 01:38, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Dylan Thomas Theatre[edit]

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

This is another no reference article on a theater in Swansea. Third party searches found nothing much on the theater, so it possibly fails WP:NBUILD Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:25, 22 August 2018 (UTC) Similiar AFDs:

notices about deletion sorting
:Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:27, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Theatre-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:27, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:27, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:27, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:27, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wales-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:27, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:32, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:32, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment I wonder if there is a way to collapse the 13 signatures above into two or three? Just curious. 96.127.244.27 (talk) 00:47, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
    Done. How's that? --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:52, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
    Thank you my friend. I wonder, are you doing WP:BEFORE on these nominations? I have found ten new refs so far (2 for this one, and 8 for the Patti theatre AfD far.96.127.244.27 (talk) 00:56, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Yeah I was. I was using Google though and wasn't sure if this qualifies or not. I know Dylan Thomas is famous but couldn't find any evidence that the theater is perhaps a historic site that satisfiy WP:NBUILD. It's one of those fringe cases so I thought I might norminate it and see. --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:59, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
I agree this one is debatable, and so is the Townhill. The Patti theatre seems outright famous though. In any case, it's good to get some more refs into the articles. have a good night.96.127.244.27 (talk) 01:02, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep Dylan Thomas acted in the troupe that inhabits the theatre, so it will be forever mentioned in each of his biographies. I had no trouble finding two decent refs in Google books.96.127.244.27 (talk) 00:56, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep Now refs added, looks fine. Johnbod (talk) 01:36, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Townhill Theatre[edit]

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

This is another no reference article on a theater in Swansea. Third party searches found nothing on the theater, so it possibly fails WP:NBUILD

Also nominating these:

Splitting apart AFD --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:27, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Similiar AFDs:

notices about deletion sorting
:Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 23:53, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Theatre-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 23:53, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 23:53, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 23:53, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 23:53, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 23:53, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wales-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 23:53, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 23:54, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment it will be difficult to discuss the notability of three different theatres in one AFD. I suggest nominating the two others separately.96.127.244.27 (talk) 00:24, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Done --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:27, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete I searched and could not find any reasonable sources.96.127.244.27 (talk) 00:44, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Taliesin Arts Centre[edit]

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

I'm not quite sure if this meets WP:NBIOWP:NBUILD. It doesn't have any references nor is it of cultural heritage. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 23:01, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Similiar AFDs:

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 23:01, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Theatre-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 23:01, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 23:01, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 23:01, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 23:01, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 23:01, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wales-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 23:01, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 23:40, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Thomas More, Lord High Chancellor of England[edit]

Thomas More, Lord High Chancellor of England (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Thomas More, Lord High Chancellor of England" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

No evidence of notability for the painting found in a search, fails WP:GNG. Article deprodded without the issue being addressed, claim of notability not substantiated despite being requested. Hzh (talk) 11:15, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 12:01, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 12:15, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Museums and libraries-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 12:16, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 08:42, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
How would anyone know that this is a painting and not about Thomas More? A redirect to the artist would merely cause confusion, especially when someone is looking for Thomas more which is the more likely reason to search for the name. It had on average less than one view per day after its creation, compared to Thomas More which is in the thousands, and it is possible that some of the few views it had might be people clicking by mistake looking for Thomas More. Hzh (talk) 11:27, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
Your question is a reasonable one but the solution is found by changing the title, not by deletion. I suppose "Painting of Thomas More, Lord High Chancellor of England" would do but I don't know if there is a standard way of doing things. I found Portrait of the Duke of Wellington when I was pondering this. Deletion is the last thing we do, not the first. Thincat (talk) 16:22, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Redirect (but don't delete) to Claudius Jacquand. Change the title to show it is a painting, not the person. Thincat (talk) 16:36, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
Changing it to "Painting of Thomas More, Lord High Chancellor of England" doesn't help, people will just confuse it with the famous one Portrait of Sir Thomas More (Holbein). This one so little known that hardly anyone will be actively looking for it. Hzh (talk) 17:14, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
OK, Painting of Thomas More (Jacquand) redirecting to Claudius Jacquand and include the redirect in Thomas More (disambiguation). Thincat (talk) 17:20, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Redirect per WP:CHEAP as suggested. The Lyons fine arts museum is a great collection. Bearian (talk) 17:58, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment The actual title of the painting is Thomas More en prison, per the museum where it is held. Of course, the same page calls it or a similar painting Thomas Morus, grand chancelier d’Angleterre (1828). Which brings up the question of why we would be using translated titles of the original work as article titles. Multiple 19C sources also use the Thoman Morus spelling, and mention prison. Perhaps this information will help someone to sort it all out. All in all, this is not a notable painting by sourcing, and no regular reader will ever be looking for it. 96.127.244.27 (talk) 17:28, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Yes, we certainly should be using translated titles of the original work as article titles - as per WP:VAMOS. Otherwise we'd get things like Иван Грозный и сын его Иван 16 ноября 1581 года! Never mind Japanese stuff. Johnbod (talk) 01:51, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Good explanation, thank you. I don't agree with the policy but will follow it.96.127.244.27 (talk) 01:55, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep, References have been added, an editor has added References. Yay. Randy Kryn (talk) 21:09, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
References do not necessarily indicate notability. Notability requires sources that provide significant coverage per WP:GNG, and the sources given appear to give only passing mentions, and do not demonstrate notability. Hzh (talk) 22:33, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
  • It is not the Mona Lisa or Guernica, and the artist is not Da Vinci or Picasso, but it is still a substantial work by a notable artist, held by a fairly significant public collection. Sources in English are thin, but then this is a painting by a (notable but) second rank French artist held for nearly 200 years in a (significant but) provincial French museum, so what do you expect. There is some background and a thorough description over four pages here (in French): [1]; and it is one of four paintings by Jacquand specifically mentioned in his entry in Larousse,[2] so clearly one of the more important works in his oeuvre. 213.205.240.163 (talk) 23:12, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep but rename per the 1832 source to "Thomas More in Prison, Visited by his Wife and Daughter" (translated), a much better title, and avoiding confusion. Johnbod (talk) 01:46, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

A Knight at Prayer in a Chapel, Preparing Himself for Combat[edit]

A Knight at Prayer in a Chapel, Preparing Himself for Combat (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "A Knight at Prayer in a Chapel, Preparing Himself for Combat" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

No evidence of notability for the painting found after a search, fails WP:GNG Hzh (talk) 11:05, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 11:55, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Museums and libraries-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 12:16, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 12:17, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment I found this but I don't think it adds much. Thincat (talk) 20:20, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
It actually adds a lot. It's two pages on the location of the panting, it's style and the historical background.96.127.244.27 (talk) 22:55, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Merge with and redirect to Fleury Francois Richard. The article on a painting is a very brief one that does not say much, and we do not need to have lots of articles like that in Wikipedia. Vorbee (talk) 20:38, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 08:39, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Redirect and merge to Fleury Francois Richard. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:52, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Yes, merge or redirect or anything except delete really. Deletion would be quite wrong. Thincat (talk) 15:56, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment I added three sources mostly reports on its acquisition by the Musee de Lyon. The problem with the article is that the actual title of the painting is Un Chevalier se préparant au combat. Someone translated the French wiki article of that name, and translated the title while doing so. This is like saying that Crépes Suzette should be called Thin Pancake Suzette. No one mentions "A Knight at Prayer in a Chapel, Preparing Himself for Combat", because that painting does not exist. 96.127.244.27 (talk) 21:38, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep, Sources have been added. Great work again 96.127.244.27 , and Wikipedia's visual arts collection owes you gratitude, thanks, and a "please jump on in" and grab a username. You have saved two articles today and both explained and shown us how it's done. Randy Kryn (talk) 21:46, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
I don't really have a keep/delete opinion here. The sources are pretty minor. But the painting has been around for 200 odd years, so it is likely that there are in-depth sources somewhere. Maybe. 96.127.244.27 (talk) 22:41, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Weak Keep Ok, I added the source by Thincat above, which goes into quite a bit of detail on the painting (I read French), and brings it up to a weak keep.96.127.244.27 (talk) 22:53, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep after changes, for which thanks! Probably needs a rename though the idea of a firm "actual title" at this period may be questionable unless it was exhibited, as this was. "Knight Preparing Himself for Combat"? Johnbod (talk) 01:21, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Agree it needs a title change. Isn't the original French title the best? Is there a wiki policy on creating new English names for foreign works? 96.127.244.27 (talk) 01:51, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
No - see WP:VAMOS. Otherwise we'd get things like Иван Грозный и сын его Иван 16 ноября 1581 года! Never mind Japanese stuff. Ideally we can source the translation, but if not we should still do it, as any Anglophone exhibition catalogue would. Johnbod (talk) 01:51, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
The absence of multiple sources that discuss the painting in detail is still problematic, the rest being trivial mentions other than the book. It does not indicate the painting has lasting notability as it appears to have been largely ignored by art historians after that was published. Hzh (talk) 09:20, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Robert Bishop (artist)[edit]

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

Unsourced and fails WP:PORNBIO. Searching brings up a lot of people with the same name. » Shadowowl | talk 10:24, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. GameInfirmary Talk 11:48, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
Delete: No inline sources for a bio at all. Plus, there is a slight promotional tone to the article. I don't see it anywhere near WP:NARTIST and WP:GNG. That being said, per nominator's comment, searching brings up a lot of people with the same name might render the article as a hoax. EROS message 15:33, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 09:44, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 09:44, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanamonde (talk) 13:15, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete: Also could not find any sources verifying this is a notable artist. Finnishela (talk) 15:55, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete: Not a hoax - it's easy to find references and collections of his work - but I couldn't find the sort of reliable sources we could build an article with. › Mortee talk 20:05, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Kika Karadi[edit]

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

Fails WP:BASIC. References appear to just be links to blogs or advertisements for the subject's exhibitions. Nominating for deletion, or redirect to John Maus. --Ilovetopaint (talk) 14:34, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hungary-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 16:01, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 16:01, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 16:01, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 16:01, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 16:02, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 16:03, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep Exhibition reviews in Artforum are usually a good indication of notability ( for example, [3]), and inclusion in the 2005 Venice Biennale is almost a guarantee that the subject is notable, but is not applicable to off-site projects that take place during the Biennale. Vexations (talk) 21:39, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep there are some articles but the in-depth coverage is fairly thin. Some of the activities mentioned above do portend notability though. Also, if I am not mistaken, AFD is not a forum for discussion of redirects, as that can be done on the talk page or at RFD.198.58.175.190 (talk) 04:26, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment Artforum review is good, but to stay consistent with other decisions here it may or may not be enough in itself. I had no success verifying the 2005 Venice Biennale. The VB is such a diffuse event, with many many people putting on their own unofficial shows, I'm a little trepidatious of accepting it at face value. I also note the preponderance of COI edits in the article history, which gives me pause. AfD does sometimes end in a redirect, but I diametrically oppose a redirect to John Maus on Gender Gap principles merely because the two happen to be (or have been?[4]) married in 2017 (though have never collaborated on any work).--Theredproject (talk) 14:58, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
For example, I can confirm that Karadi was not the artist in the Hungarian national pavilion. That was Balázs Kicsiny [5] --Theredproject (talk) 15:41, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
It looks like she participated in "Poles Together, Poles Apart", not what we'd typically consider the Venice Biennale itself, that would be either one of the national pavilions or the show in the Arsenale. We cannot credibly claim that she participated in the Venice Biennale. --Vexations (talk) 16:18, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
Per [6] "An outdoor installation of 101 artists displayed on the wooden poles along Venice’s waterways." Per [7] "This exhibition was an official off-site project of the Venice Biennale, 51st Venice Biennial, Venice, Italy, June 12-November 12, 2005" --Theredproject (talk) 17:30, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 20:26, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nosebagbear (talk) 10:27, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Krzysztof Konopka[edit]

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

The two books of this author are published by a e-publishing website run by a journalist and all references are either from this website or from promotional activities to push these books. There are no independent sources to establish notability. Staszek Lem (talk) 16:53, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Gameinfirmary (talk) 16:55, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Gameinfirmary (talk) 16:55, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Gameinfirmary (talk) 16:55, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. Gameinfirmary (talk) 16:55, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep Many famous authors financed their books and it is nothing bad. E-Literaci is a literary portal, not the e-publishing portal. It is a website for poets. They publish their poems, especially in anthologies. But the publisher of first two book written by Krzysztof Konopka is Barbara Mazurkiewicz, who is a journalist, poet and publisher. She is a well-known poet and has received many prestigious awards. Krzysztof Konopka's book are famous, because he was very young when he published his first book. But he wrote many other books. In 2018 his new book will have a premiere and the publisher is not E-Literaci, but big publishing house. Krzysztof Konopka as a young author has difficulty publishing books in large publishing houses, because they publish books written by famous authors. But many people read his books. There are other reviews in the Internet. People should give him a chance. His book are very important and a lot of people know it. And there are a lot of independent sources to establish notability. The user who wants to delete the article is not objective.GertaGreen 22:20, 03 September 2018 (UTC)
    • Comment This is a newly created user with an obvious WP:COI who is yet to understand how wikipedia works. Staszek Lem (talk) 21:22, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment I do not read Polish, but it's worth noting that half the sources given appear to be user forum links rather than independent sources. 96.127.244.201 (talk) 03:52, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
  • There are a lot of results in GBooks for "Krzysztof Konopka", but they seem to be about another person or other persons as they were published before (often more than a decade before) 2015. I think there might be a notable photographer with this name. A search for "Krzysztof Konopka"+2015 or +2016 doesn't bring up anything in GBooks that would satisfy GNG. James500 (talk) 04:44, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep Books of this author are real. They are in Polish National Library and Jagiellonian Library like other books. And they are in many libraries in Poland, I checked that. It is difficult to find informations about Krzysztof Konopka in Google, because there are a lot of people with the same name. This page should not be deleted, because it is notable. Antek.antek9710:20, 04 September 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 16:56, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 01:14, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete: I cannot find sourcing to show the subject meets WP:GNG. There isn't even an article on the Polish wikipedia on this person. It may seem cool to have a wikipedia article about yourself when you are 18, but BLPs like this can always backfire. This is the only policy based !vote since the nomination.--Milowenthasspoken 19:12, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete Nom and Milowent have this article, and subject's notability, pegged.E.M.Gregory (talk) 23:07, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Visual arts - Proposed deletions[edit]

Visual arts - Images for Deletion[edit]

Visual arts - Deletion Review[edit]

Performing arts[edit]

Comedians[edit]

Click the "►" below to see all subcategories:

Dancers[edit]

Click the "►" below to see all subcategories:

Directors[edit]

Musicians[edit]

Magicians[edit]

Writers and critics[edit]

Arts and Entertainment Work Group - Writers and critics

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

Related Projects

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

Related Portals

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

FAs and GAs
Announcements/To do (edit)

Members[edit]

Categories[edit]

Click the "►" below to see all subcategories:

Comics writers[edit]

Click the "►" below to see all subcategories:

Romance authors[edit]

Lists[edit]

Poets[edit]

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

Stubs[edit]

Authors / Writers deletions[edit]

Authors / Writers deletion sorting discussions


Authors[edit]

Peyman Hooshmandzadeh[edit]

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

Notability aside, WP:TNT applies here. This reads more like a puff piece than an encyclopedia article. Accesscrawl (talk) 07:38, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. Accesscrawl (talk) 07:46, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Accesscrawl (talk) 07:46, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Accesscrawl (talk) 07:46, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 07:53, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 07:54, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 07:54, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Lore Sjöberg[edit]

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

No acceptable citations. Highly promotional, non-encyclopedic. Notability not established. Basilosauridae❯❯❯Talk 20:17, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 20:22, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. Dom from Paris (talk) 20:39, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Dom from Paris (talk) 20:39, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:44, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Dylan Thomas Theatre[edit]

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

This is another no reference article on a theater in Swansea. Third party searches found nothing much on the theater, so it possibly fails WP:NBUILD Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:25, 22 August 2018 (UTC) Similiar AFDs:

notices about deletion sorting
:Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:27, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Theatre-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:27, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:27, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:27, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:27, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wales-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:27, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:32, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:32, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment I wonder if there is a way to collapse the 13 signatures above into two or three? Just curious. 96.127.244.27 (talk) 00:47, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
    Done. How's that? --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:52, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
    Thank you my friend. I wonder, are you doing WP:BEFORE on these nominations? I have found ten new refs so far (2 for this one, and 8 for the Patti theatre AfD far.96.127.244.27 (talk) 00:56, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Yeah I was. I was using Google though and wasn't sure if this qualifies or not. I know Dylan Thomas is famous but couldn't find any evidence that the theater is perhaps a historic site that satisfiy WP:NBUILD. It's one of those fringe cases so I thought I might norminate it and see. --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:59, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
I agree this one is debatable, and so is the Townhill. The Patti theatre seems outright famous though. In any case, it's good to get some more refs into the articles. have a good night.96.127.244.27 (talk) 01:02, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep Dylan Thomas acted in the troupe that inhabits the theatre, so it will be forever mentioned in each of his biographies. I had no trouble finding two decent refs in Google books.96.127.244.27 (talk) 00:56, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep Now refs added, looks fine. Johnbod (talk) 01:36, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Sarwanand (Sarvanand) Koul Premi[edit]

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

This seems to be a greatly exaggerated tragedy. The sources provided are mostly unintelligible at best but seem to be quite embellished. All other sources I've found are either rehashing the four here, are not about him or are blogs. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 13:54, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Dom from Paris (talk) 18:19, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Dom from Paris (talk) 18:19, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Dom from Paris (talk) 18:19, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep. This is not a BLP1E. There have been posthumous medals awarded to him, and one of the references was written in 2017, demonstrating that the world did not forget about him after 1990.. Political murders attract more attention than murders by a family member or murders as part of a robbery attempt because they are intended to force a political change. It is also possible that he is notable as an author, but if his writings were reviewed by a reliable source, the review would probably have been in the same language as the work. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 19:36, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Stuff being written about someone isn't a criteria, it's reliable, in depth content being written about them. The sources in that article and the only others I've found are unreliable. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 19:58, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
  • I'm inclined towards a keep because it appears he was a known writer[1] This doesn't give a date of death though (and spells his name differently). Better references are definitely needed. Could we seek help from WikiProject India / Jammu and Kashmir? Deb (talk) 08:12, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Kartik Chandra Dutt (1999). Who's who of Indian Writers, 1999: A-M. Sahitya Akademi. pp. 585–. ISBN 978-81-260-0873-5. 

Surendra Pratap Singh (author)[edit]

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

Doesn't appear to be a notable author. Created by an SPA; references are to his own books, Goodreads, and a Blogspot blog. power~enwiki (π, ν) 05:23, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 05:50, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 05:50, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete: A poorly-referenced WP:SPA article on a writer who has published via Invincible Publishers and Marketeers and previously Authors Press. Aside from others of the same name (journalist, vice-chancellor, judge), my searches are finding only a possible passing mention which may be the subject in an article documenting a political meet-and-greet in Varanasi ([8]), though the article indicates the subject lives elsewhere. As things stand, I see no evidence that the subject meets WP:AUTHOR. AllyD (talk) 07:21, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete - he's written one self-published novel from Invincible Publishers, a vanity press, which does not make him a "writer". We are not a spam dumping ground. Bearian (talk) 14:29, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete - article does not demonstrate topic meets WP:GNG. - Scarpy (talk) 20:29, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Brittany Ashley[edit]

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

None of these are reliable sources, and appearing in buzzfeed videos does not indicate notability. Natureium (talk) 01:13, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 01:21, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 01:21, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 01:21, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 01:21, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
  • .COmment @Natureium: Please see the potential references at [9] and the following pages. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 01:28, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
    • I've looked, and didn't find any that appear to be reliable sources. Natureium (talk) 11:58, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 05:55, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 05:55, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep her bio meets WP:BASIC, while some of the citations are from the video postings at the sources themselves--this is natural seeing as she rose to fame via those internet sources. All of the combined sources and additional outside coverage clearly indicate that Brittany Ashley is a Internet celebrity, she is also the main subject in pieces that appear in the Washington Post, Bustle, The Wrap, Variety, Newsweek, La Weekly, Huffington Post, among others. Most of her videos have over 1 million views (such as "Dating Problems Every Lesbian Will Recognize" -- 6.4 million views. While Youtube may be a public platform, BuzzFeed Video is not--not anyone can create these videos and not anyone can amass the amount of views, shares, and followers as her work does. She was also interviewed by Carson Daly for her performances.

In addition, other YouTube/Buzzfeed shows/personalities also have their own pages: The Try Guys Tyler Oakley Michelle Phan Broke (web series) PewDiePie Ryan Higa Onision Like these aforementioned Youtubers, Ashley also has a large fan base and thus meets WP:Entertainer cbratbyrudd (talk) 13:46, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

  • Keep (but trim) - there are enough third party reliable sources to establish notability, but also appears that there's some web citations that are unnecessary. Content based on sources not representing periodicals should be removed. - Scarpy (talk) 19:15, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep Agreeing that there are sufficient sources for notability, but the article does need some cleanup. I've done a little bit to try to help out. LovelyLillith (talk) 22:40, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Lyle Skains[edit]

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

Nonremarkable person that does not qualify under WP:AUTHOR. 1l2l3k (talk) 15:20, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 16:57, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 16:57, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wales-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 16:58, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Kiko Laxa Ferrer[edit]

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

Not a notable internet personality/literary manager. He isn't the author of the books pictured in the infobox, nor is he mentioned on the online stores used as references. power~enwiki (π, ν) 23:23, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 05:43, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 05:43, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 05:44, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 05:44, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 05:44, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete non-notable person, Fails GNG. Emily Khine (talk) 12:56, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete The article is largely sourced to non-RS such as YouTube and retail websites like www.nationalbookstore.com. My BEFORE search in the usual places (JSTOR, Google Books, Google News, newspapers.com) fails to find anything that would help this pass GNG. Chetsford (talk) 17:20, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Holland Davis[edit]

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

Fails WP:MUSICBIO and WP:GNG . All of the sources are self-published I should have written that the sourced do not discuss the subject in detail. Only passing mentions. I see no source to support notability. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:57, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

  • Keep Sources are not self-published. They are from 3rd party, independent magazine reviews, articles and music industry sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hollanddavis (talkcontribs) 17:08, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
    • You're right. I should have written that the sourced do not discuss the subject in detail. Only passing mentions. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:12, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
      • They substantiate the body of compositions as a songwriter whose works are award winning and have sold over 1,000,000 units (WOW Worship Blue) and 500,000 units (Top 25 Praise Songs) which meets the criteria for notability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hollanddavis (talkcontribs) 17:26, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
        • That's clear, but a large body of works is not a criteria for inclusion. And the albums have sold well, but we need sources to support that your contributions on those compilation albums was the reason they sold well. Since your solo albums have not achieved success or notability, it follows that it's likely the act of being a compilation album that helped them to sell well. So unless you or your works have directly won an award, there is no notability. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:53, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
  • I don't believe your reasoning is factual. To say a song on a compilation does not contribute to the sales of the compilation does not make sense. The reason why you include songs is to include the songs that will gain the most sales. WOW Worship is best of compilation selecting from the top 100 songs performed in churches at that time. Holland Davis did win several awards. He was awarded an ASCAP award for most played song in 2006 for Let It Rise. He was awarded one platinum and two gold records for WOW Worship and Top 25 Praise Songs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hollanddavis (talkcontribs) 01:10, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
  • I'm sorry you don't the simple logic I presented because it does make sense. For instance, in country music in particular, a single hit song will not usually increase sales for an album. There are instances where a musician in that category will have multiple singles and the album itself does not sell. However if those same hit singles are released on a compilation album along with other hits, then the compilation will sell. It's the fact that it's a collection of good songs that make compilation sell, not the presence of any one song. If you can show a source that states that the presence of your song boosted sales by even 1%, you would have a clear point. I suspect that if your song was removed from those compilations and another song from a different worship musician had been included, the album would have not have sold significantly better or worse. I would argue that "Good, Good Father" is a more notable song than "let It Arise" and neither Pat Barrett nor Anthony Brown have articles (althoughg Housefires does, based on the weight of their third album). And I'm curious why you're referring to yourself in the third person. The award was not for most played song in 2006, but one of the most performed Christian songs of the year. Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:00, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
  • You cannot compare Good Good Father with Let It Rise (it is not Let It Arise... maybe that's the issue, you've confused the song with a different song)... Good Good Father is recently released and still building notability. Let It Rise, achieved notability in the 90's as a top 100 CCLI song (which earned the song a place on the multi-platinum selling WOW Worship Blue) which is based on usage in churches and a Top 25 charting position with Big Daddy Weave again in the 2000's as well as a #2 position on the gospel charts by William Murphy. Can you name another worship song that has achieved Top 25 placements on Billboard in 2 different genres at the same time? As well as achieving multi-platinum status on a compilation with notability spanning 2 decades? It appears the song meets the criteria for notariety... inclusion on charts, winning multi-platinum status. It appears the songwriter has been credited as writing the song that has been recorded by notable groups. It appears to meet the notability requirements on several points. All it needs to do is meet one to be deemed notable. You are correct it was the the 25 most performed Christian songs of the year is the official category title. It was for the most plays on radio (which means it charted in the top 25) which again proves the notability of the song and the writer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.4.22.3 (talk) 15:29, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 17:36, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 17:36, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete: About the composition,

Composers, songwriters, librettists or lyricists, may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria:
1. Has credit for writing or co-writing either lyrics or music for a notable composition.
[...]
3. Has had a work used as the basis for a later composition by a songwriter, composer or lyricist who meets the above criteria.

(WP:COMPOSER)
"Let It Rise" does not appear to be notable, though. Per WP:NSONG, emphasis mine:

Songs and singles are probably notable if they have been the subject of multiple, non-trivial published works whose sources are independent of the artist and label.

Also, from the "subject" footnote of that guideline:

The "subject" of a work means non-trivial treatment and excludes mere mention of the song/single, its musician/band or of its publication, price listings and other non-substantive detail treatment.

This does not appear to be the case, no matter how best-selling the album was. The whole "Awards" section might be inadequate praise, as these awards have never been awarded to the article subject themselves. About Holland Davis, I can not find independent, significant coverage that addresses him directly and in detail, per WP:GNG. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 17:55, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
The ASCAP Award was awarded to Holland Davis as the writer of Let It Rise which was one of the most performed songs of 2006. it both establishes the notability of the song and the songwriter as ASCAP is a song based PRO. If it helps establish the case, I can list a number of records who have recorded Let It Rise from non-trivial works? It's easy to establish the value of the song. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hollanddavis (talkcontribs) 18:11, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
As far as charting... Let It Rise appeared on the Billboard Hot Christian Adult Contemporary Chart 11/6/2006 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hollanddavis (talkcontribs) 18:18, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
A standalone article about a song should satisfy the above criteria. Any of the following factors suggest that a song or single may be notable enough that a search for coverage in reliable independent sources will be successful.
Has been ranked on national or significant music or sales charts. (Note again that this indicates only that a song may be notable, not that it is notable.)
Has won one or more significant awards or honors, such as a Grammy, Juno, Mercury, Choice or Grammis award.
Has been independently released as a recording by several notable artists, bands, or groups. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hollanddavis (talkcontribs) 18:21, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
@Hollanddavis: The ASCAP Award was awarded to Holland Davis, as person? Not just mentioning the song? I can not find that at this link, and the reference link in the "Awards" section is broken. Please provide a reliable source for this statement. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:24, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
When quoting guidelines, and when copying text from any page, please mention where you have taken it from, where the quotation begins, and where the quotation ends. Please fix that above. Thank you. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:24, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
Comment. I note that a user called User:hollanddavis is posting here, and has been very active and editing the page. Even if the subject is notable, there appears to be a serious conflict of interest which should be addressed. If User:hollanddavis believes the page should stay, then he needs to establish which aspects of WP:NMUSIC are satisfied. Ross-c (talk) 18:56, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

The ASCAP listing the mention of the song and the writer is who the award went to... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hollanddavis (talkcontribs) 22:18, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

  • Keep definite WP:COI and if this is kept the artist should not directly edit it but instead make suggestions on the talk page. However, he does seem to pass WP:NMUSIC with charting hit singles on billboard, and he has coverage in christian music reliable sources such as CrossRhythmns, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 17:18, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
@Atlantic306: WP:NMUSIC lists reasons why a musician may be notable. They are not automatically defined, not even necessarily "likely" to be notable if one of the examples listed there applies. Also, could you please specify which part of WP:NMUSIC you are referring to? The "reliable source" at CrossRhythms (link) appears to be an interview where the musician talks about themselves, which is explicitly not included by WP:NMUSIC#Criteria for musicians and ensembles, point 1. The "charting" in Christian music does not appear to be the same as appearing on "any country's national music chart" per point 2. The musician also does not appear to have "won or been nominated for a major music award, such as a Grammy, Juno, Mercury, Choice or Grammis award." per point 8. The word "major" is important here. I have not seen anything "major" in that regard yet. Please also note that "Wikipedia should not have a separate article on [...] any subject that, despite the person meeting the rules of thumb described above, for which editors ultimately cannot locate independent sources that provide in-depth information about the subject.", per WP:NMUSIC as well. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:26, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
    • The album reviews at Cross Rythm are reliable intellectually independent sources that count towards WP:GNG, meeting one of the criteria on WP:NMUSIC means exactly that a musician is likely to be notable and the Billboard christian music charts are national charts as opposed to state or local and are widely quoted in christian music reliable sources so criteria 2 of WP:NMUSIC is clearly passed,regards Atlantic306 (talk) 11:59, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Jessica Jane pile[edit]

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

Fails WP:NAUTHOR and GNG. Nothing found in a before search. Dom from Paris (talk) 08:05, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Dom from Paris (talk) 08:19, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Dom from Paris (talk) 08:19, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Dom from Paris (talk) 08:19, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Tacyarg (talk) 19:20, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Delete - not finding any WP:RS coverage. Tacyarg (talk) 19:20, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete sources on page are PRIMARY; neither author not book are coming up in my searches.E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:39, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Monica Valentinelli[edit]

Monica Valentinelli (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

(Find sources: "Monica Valentinelli" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference) This BLP AFD was previously closed as "No Consensus" more than two months ago. I am renominating it as a failure of the WP:GNG, for the following reasons:

  • Of the seven sources, none contain verifiable, biographical information:
  1. one (geeknative.com) is a non-RS blog,
  2. one (Onyx Path website) is not WP:INDEPENDENT,
  3. three contain purely incidental mentions of her of between one to three sentences or are simply extended quotes from her social media (and, therefore, not intellectually independent),
  4. two are either pseudo-reviews or book lists of her books (one is a trade review on Publishers Weekly, the second is inclusion of a book on an "upcoming titles" list on Fantasy & Science Fiction)
  • My BEFORE search on Google News, Google Books, JSTOR, and newspapers.com finds no other RS.
  • On a note not strictly related to the AFD, in this article we use "themarysue.com" to affirmatively declare another BLP (James Frenkel, whose own article is largely sourced to Twitter and Livejournal and should also probably be AFD'ed) has engaged in harassment. While this is not done in WP's own voice it still probably needs sourcing to something more substantial than a website whose declared beat is "comic book movies ... and the weirdest finds on the internet", if available.

GF pinging previous !voters and closer: User:Chrissymad, User:BOZ, User:Calton, User:Agricola44, User:Newimpartial, User:Hobit, User:TonyBallioni, User:Ritchie333. Chetsford (talk) 05:41, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

  • (A) I think I should point out that Publishers Weekly is not "trade". (1) It is read by librarians. University, school and public librarians are certainly academics, scholars and educationalists. They are certainly not tradesmen. Librarianship (aka library science, information studies etc) is a scholarly academic discipline. There is no such thing as a "library trade". (2) It is read by bibliographers. They are academic scholars pursuing an academic scholarly discipline. (3) It is read by the book buying and reading general public. They are not tradesmen either. (B) The book review in Publishers Weekly is not a psuedo-review, and it counts towards WP:AUTHOR like any other periodical book review. James500 (talk) 06:35, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Chetsford (talk) 05:49, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Chetsford (talk) 05:47, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Chetsford (talk) 05:46, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Newimpartial (talk) 12:07, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Newimpartial (talk) 12:07, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. Newimpartial (talk) 12:07, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep if more sources can be found, otherwise move to WP:DRAFT-space so it can be worked on. BOZ (talk) 11:27, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
In principal I have no problem draftifying just about any kind of article. However, I do have a problem draftifying BLPs since we have an obligation to the privacy of individuals to use publicly accessible areas of WP to only host content that is accurate and verifiable. A BLP deleted for absence of RS, therefore, should not be draftified except in a few special cases of which this is not one. If the situation with this individual's notability changes in the future a WP:REFUND could always be requested. Chetsford (talk) 20:26, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
  • keep I believe we typically book reviews are used as RSes for authors (and reviews of an art show for artists etc.). And she's seen limited coverage beyond book reviews in reliable sources. Hobit (talk) 15:56, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete per all of my reasons in the past. The "Keep if we can..." should hold no weight, otherwise AFD is meaningless. We can always wait and wait and have "ifs" but without concrete reliable sources, well, it needs to be deleted. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 16:55, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete' and Note that Publisher's Weekly publishes very brief reviews of all books being promote by reputable publishers; WP editors therefore do not count PubWeekly reviews as contributing notability to a book. Valentinelli is mentioned briefly in a few places, mostly minor blogs. Fails WP:CREATIVE, WP:SIGCOV. It's probably just WP:TOOSOON.E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:47, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment E.M.Gregory I have to disagree with you about Publisher's Weekly. While the reviews are not always lengthy, they absolutely do not review "all books" published by reputable publishers. In fact, I once looked and broke it down and found that they are actually very selective. While I personally prefer other review sources when making collection development decisions (for various reasons that are not pertinent here), PW remains a valid RS for Wikipedia's purposes, just as James500 pointed out. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:47, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment I wish Publisher's Weekly reviewed all books. It's so hard for small-press published authors to get into libraries. But yeah, it appears the OP doesn't have the best grasp of the publishing industry, let alone little subsets like RPG publishing. Simonm223 (talk) 18:55, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep while not a case of BLP1E, the sexual harassment incident received widespread coverage as part of a general process of introspection on sexual harassment in gaming; combined with the reviews this definitely puts Valentinelli on the right side of GNG and NBIO requirements. Newimpartial (talk) 20:00, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
the sexual harassment incident received widespread coverage - Where? My BEFORE search on Google News, Google Books, JSTOR, and newspapers.com finds no other RS mentioning Monica Valentinelli. Chetsford (talk) 20:21, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
I'm just not finding sources. The best I can find is a brief mentions in the WaPo aritcle [10].E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:29, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Same. Chetsford (talk) 20:31, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
That seems legit as an additional, mainstream source after themarysue (which is already a RS per editorial oversight and professionalism).
Anyway, after the Hillfolk/concrete nomination, I will not be helping you find sources. ;) Newimpartial (talk) 04:48, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
Note to closer - see above. The argument that sources exist but they cannot or will not be disclosed fails the WP:ORGSIG requirement that sources be demonstrated as opposed to simply being declared. Please weigh this argument appropriately. Chetsford (talk) 18:16, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
The sources in the article plus WaPo are more than enough to establish NBIO; you need not petition me for more. Also, as I have noted in other AfDs, you have mistaken the status of Geeknative: its author is a communications professional and journalist who has written on RPGs for Enworld and The Scotsman; therefore Geeknative falls into the class of reliable, self-published sources. Also note that "Industry insider" status at Gencon and Guest of Honour status at Ropecon also contribute to NBIO and CREATIVE, much as you might wish otherwise. Newimpartial (talk)
I disagree that a person who has contributed a story to a RS (The Scotsman) is, thereafter, a standalone RS for all time. (That said, I'm probably just generally incredulous that we would ever greenlight something called "Geeknative Blog" as a RS for sourcing to the high threshold demanded of BLPs. This is frightening and concerning.) Second, can you clarify which of the four criterions of WP:NCREATIVE being an "Industry Insider" at the 3900-attendance "Ropecon" game fair meets? Chetsford (talk) 19:05, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
It isn't just the story for The Scotsman; I would almost think you're trolling, but I will AGF per policy.
I will also AGF and assume some kind of intellectual dyslexia: Ropecon is a Guest of Honor status and Gencon is Industry Insider; the criterion they fit is as evidence of "being regarded as an important figure ... by peers or successors", which you would presumably know if you had read NCREATIVE. I get the sense you are uncomfortable letting creative types decide who is important in their respective fields, but that's what NBIO does. Newimpartial (talk) 19:17, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
I get the sense you are uncomfortable letting creative types Not at all. I think our gap of mutuality here is that I'm not comfortable classifying someone who has written an instructional manual for a game as a "creative type" in the way the meaning was intended by NCREATIVE; something that NBOOK says as much when it states that "instruction books" are specifically disincluded from its criteria. I also don't see being an "Industry Insider" at 3900-attendance Ropecon is a greater point of notability than being an "Industry Accolade" at the 40,000-attendance Concrete World Expo [11]; objectively, however, we would never OK a BLP to Bob Harris of the Decorative Concrete Institute on the basis of him being one once. We all have hobbies but, I think, it's important we are able to properly contextualize the relative importance of those hobbies within society at large and take care we aren't re-imagining their import to squeeze square pegs into round holes. Monica Valentinelli is not exactly Gabriel Marquez; she doesn't have to be for inclusion on WP but she can't be Bob Harris either. But I appreciate we may have to agree to disagree on these points. Thanks! Chetsford (talk) 19:28, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
This statement above is why you probably shouldn't be AfDing RPG related content until you've taken some time to learn something about the field you are discussing. I don't think you have a very strong grasp of what the RPG profession entails, what an RPG constitutes, nor how it connects to the publishing community at large. Simonm223 (talk) 19:37, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
I do, however, I appreciate we may have different opinions on game production (creative versus manufacturing) and certainly respect your different view of it. Chetsford (talk) 19:40, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment - Well, Chet, if you want to have an RfC or a Village Pump discussion about whether game designers are covered by CREATIVE, and whether books of game rules, settings and scenarios are covered by NBOOK (as is true for both fiction and non-fiction in general, so there shouldn't be much moving of goalposts), I think that would be grand. It would probably be better for the project than if we "agree to disagree" (sic.)
We will certainly continue to disagree about the CREATIVE applications of concrete, although I accept that it has some in the hands of an ARTIST or to entomb one's gangster enemies. :) It doesn't matter, by the way, how many people attend your outlaw biker or undertaker convention, it doesn't make either one relevant to the regard one is held by one's CREATIVE peers. Newimpartial (talk) 19:44, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
Sounds good. Ping me when Wizard's Spell Compendium, Volume 4 gets a Pulitzer nomination or its authors an OBE and I'll happily adjust my position. Until then, they're in the same category as Home & Deck Repair, vol. 6: Stains & Finishing; recognized within their industry but completely unacknowledged outside it. There's nothing inherently wrong or disreputable about that and it is no cause for offense, but it is a fact and it needs to be mentioned to help evaluate the suitability of an article for WP when a small industry accolade is mentioned as a cause for keep. Chetsford (talk) 21:55, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete' No evidence of notability.Slatersteven (talk) 09:38, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
Per WP:CREATIVE, however, a person has the presumption of notability if they create notable works; as lead writer of the Firefly RPG and lead designer of Hunter: the Vigil, she certainly meets this criterion. Then it is a matter of sourcing, and at last count we have six independent, reliable sources plus the Guest of Honor roles, all of which pretty much nails down the sourcing, I think.
I know people get confused about NOTINHERITED, but its application to creators and works is quite simple: creators do not contribute notability to their works, but works most certainly do lend (presumptive) notability to their creators, per NBIO. Newimpartial (talk) 19:08, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Speedy Keep With a small COI disclosure that I have friends who are friends with her, although I don't know her personally. The whole Frenkel situation was a huge in-community kerfuffle, I know WP:BLP1E but aside from this, she's a deeply respected and highly credentialed person within the field and with RSes from the Verge to Publisher's Weekly on the page already I am baffled anyone thought she wasn't notable. Simonm223 (talk) 17:05, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
I actually missed that she'd been blurbed by Charles de Lint - which yeah. I mean when a PW mentioned author and games designer is blurbed on her short story anthology by a living legend, how much more notable do you have to be? Simonm223 (talk) 17:17, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
A blurb ≠ WP:SIGCOV.E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:38, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Frederick T. Haneman[edit]

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

There seem to be no indepth reliable independent sources about Haneman, and half the info in the current article is unverifiable (New York Journal info is unverifiable, and the "American Jewish Yearbook" seem to refer to one entry he wrote for it, nothing more. Birth year of 1863 also wasn't verifiable) Fram (talk) 13:09, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 15:18, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 15:18, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 15:19, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. Killiondude (talk) 01:29, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
  • I had a tough time finding any sources in various databases, even searching for "FT Haneman," which it seems he may have been credit by in at least one of the publications mentioned in the article. Killiondude (talk) 01:29, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep. Satisfies GNG. Managing editor of the New York Medical Journal (hence the confusion), and I see amongst other things an obituary (Jersey Shore) giving date of death as 1950, a book review in the Athenaeum and biographical dictionary says "Haneman Frederick Theodore" editor of said medical journal born 20 September 1862 [12] (not 1863), so that clears up that mystery as well. James500 (talk) 19:23, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 21:06, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Sunkanmi Vaughan[edit]

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

Notability concerns. The only claim of notability appears to be references describing how his book is the #1 app for a specific search term in the Google Play store. power~enwiki (π, ν) 18:52, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 22:40, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 22:40, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
Strong Keep: The author is Nigerian, a third world nation that was faced with recession in 2016. The author's book is popular in the country because it played a very key role in sustaining business and market ideas among the Nigerian populace during the recession. Millions of copies of the book have been sold. With over 100,000 copies sold globally. The book is currently being used as a teaching tool for Entrepreneurial Skills in a few Nigerian higher institutions of learning. The author deserves a place in the encyclopedia as in years to come, people will want to find out what stood out for him as he helped millions of negerians survive, despite the recession. I do wish you see to it please and not delete the article. Thank you.Stevedure (talk) 09:38, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
I agree @Bearian: The Nation Nigeria [13] is a national newspaper in Nigeria. And Nairaland [14]is the biggest online forum in Africa with Editors (Moderators) who review every post before allowing such a post, if found worthy, taken to its front page. In my knowledge, I think those are worthy sources. Stevedure (talk) 01:30, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
Nairaland is an internet forum, it is not a reliable source. Please don't mention Nairaland again else AFD patrollers will not take you seriously.
Friendly tip: Any website that allows you to create content without verifying who you are can never be used as a source on Wikipedia.HandsomeBoy (talk) 23:50, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
Comment it's true that online forums aren't generally given much weight in discussions. More problematic is that those are both articles by Vaughan, with no evidence that anyone else is discussing them. power~enwiki (π, ν) 23:57, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
Thank you HandsomeBoy Stevedure (talk) 19:02, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
Reply @Power~enwiki: I hope you agree with @Bearian: that controversy can make notability! I think what needs to be done now is find Better Sources Stevedure (talk) 19:02, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Are there secondary sources available?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Alpha3031 (tc) 04:09, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
Secondary Sources Kindly refer the following sources: [15], [16], [17] [18], [19]
Stevedure (talk) 05:11, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Fernando R. Gómez[edit]

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

Not finding much independent coverage in reliable sources about this subject; specifically, there's a lack of significant coverage in non-primary, non-LDS related sources. As per source searches for said independent coverage, the subject does not appear to meet WP:BASIC. Several primary sources exist about the subject, but they are not usable to establish notability. See also: WP:SPIP:

The barometer of notability is whether people independent of the topic itself (or of its manufacturer, creator, author, inventor, or vendor) have actually considered the topic notable enough that they have written and published non-trivial works of their own that focus upon it—without incentive, promotion, or other influence by people connected to the topic matter.

North America1000 02:02, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. North America1000 02:03, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. North America1000 02:04, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Utah-related deletion discussions. North America1000 02:04, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment on possibility of WP:AUTHOR notability: Article was a bit vague on his publications, so I added bibliographic entries to help clarify what the titles in the article actually refer to. He has 2 other publications in WorldCat (click the identity at the bottom of the article). Like the works mentioned in the article they are published by the museum and held in very few collections, basically BYU and a few others. Bakazaka (talk) 03:22, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep Gomez has merited significant mention in multiple articles in the Journal of Mormon history, an indepdent scholarly journal. Excluding that source does not make sense at all.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:30, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment – The Journal of Mormon History sources were added after the nomination for deletion occurred, not before. North America1000 03:47, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  • So you admit to having done sub-standard work in searching out sources. Does this mean you also agree to withdraw the nomination since your central claim has been shown to be incorrect?John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:13, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Nope, not at all. My deletion nominations always exceed the suggested source searches at part D of WP:BEFORE. Furthermore, The Journal of Mormon History sources added to the article do not show up in Google Scholar searches.
Lastly, below is a review of the The Journal of Mormon History sources that were added to the article:
  • [20] – Consists of a review that the subject performed about another person's work, concluded with a very short "about the reviewer" passage at the end of the review. This does not provide significant coverage about the subject whatsoever, and does not qualify notability.
  • [21] – significant coverage of a non-notable series of four articles that the subject authored, and various matters the subject was involved in in Mexico.
– Thus far, only one independent, reliable source providing significant coverage exists. Please note that WP:BASIC requires significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources, not just one. Unless more said required sources exist, the subject simply does not meet WP:BASIC. Also, again, WP:SPIP comes to mind. North America1000 08:00, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, [[User:Sandstein|</noinclude>
  • Keep - I am quite impressed that User: John Pack Lambert is going for a Keep, as he normally goes for delete at these discussions. Vorbee (talk) 08:13, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment@Vorbee: Your !vote does not provide a valid rationale for the article to be retained. Commentary about how another user !votes in various discussions states nothing about the subject that this discussion is about. North America1000 10:16, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

OK - thank you Northamerica. Fair enough comment. Vorbee (talk) 11:39, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

  • Weak Keep Appears to be a highly notable person within the church. Church News seems to be a good enough refernce, but it is marginal. Middledistance99 (talk) 10:20, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment@Middledistance99: Church News is owned by the LDS church, and is the official newspaper of the LDS Church. As such, it is a primary source that does not serve to establish notability for Wikipedia's purposes. Subjects that the LDS church find to be noteworthy are not necessarily notable as per Wikipedia's standards. Multiple, independent reliable sources that provide significant coverage about the subject are needed to qualify notability. Mormon subjects and leaders do not get a free pass for an article without said independent coverage, because there is no guideline or policy that allows for presumed notability for Mormon subjects. North America1000to 10:25, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment Fair enough, although the primary reference is still a good source of info. Clearly 3 independent sources have not been found, but the admin will have to see whether or not this is a problem which needs to be solved by deletion. Middledistance99 (talk) 21:36, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment Gomez has no high position of leadership in the LDS Church. I think the argument that a widely circulated News Paper is always a primary source based on who its publisher is, and we then use this to disqualify any articles from that newspaper to add towards notability is a much too large carve out. To call some newspaper primary sources and some secondary is a misuse of the terms. Gomez has no control over the production decisions of the LDS Church News.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:28, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Mark Penney[edit]

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

Does not seem to meet WP:NBIO notability. Found little to no third party references about the person. Neither the English or the French Wikipedia articles listed any references. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 22:49, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

Comment: Article seem to be recreated on August 22, 2015, following the deletion vote at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Penney on Janunary 14, 2006 --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 22:53, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 22:50, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

AFD for film maker:

AFD of his films:

--Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 22:39, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 22:50, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 22:50, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 01:33, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Delete Keep I'd like to vote otherwise, since he has produced a body of work that has screened at many international film festivals, but independent media coverage seems to be entirely lacking. Changed opinion as per E.M.Gregory below. With at least one review in a national newspaper (The National Post), I suspect there are additional reviews that can be found. Curiocurio (talk) 15:35, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete per above. We would expect more reliable media coverage since this was a recreation. GenuineArt (talk) 15:16, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete - Wow, I didn't think we had any more unsourced BLPs after all these years. I realize that this 2005 piece is grandfathered under the old rules, but if people can't be arsed to add a single source in 13 years, I reckon we're well in the realm of non-notability under our GNG. Carrite (talk) 15:44, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

*Keep WP:HEY I added a pair of reviews innational papers. Note also that he co-wrote Coldwater (film) (it had not been on his page), and his early film The Right Way (2004 film) was the professional debut of Keir Gilchrist and got full-length reviews in Canada's two leading national daily newspapers. There is enough here to meet WP:CREATIVE.E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:51, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

  • User:Curiocurio, I have added film reviews, and a profile in a local paper, feel free to add material about film festival screenings.E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:37, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 06:59, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak Delete – It was deleted 10 years ago in the 1st nomination and there was no reason for it to be kept in the 2nd nomination if the only new films he created aren't notable and are currently nominated for deletion. Redditaddict69 10:06, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
  • so , there are 2 filmmakers named Mark Penney, about the same age, both Canadian. and this one did not create Coldwater (film).E.M.Gregory (talk) 11:06, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete, or possibly redirect, this bio to the only film of some significance Penny created, The Right Way (2004 film).E.M.Gregory (talk) 11:06, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Richard S. Kirby[edit]

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

I see no basis for notability. The best I find is a discussion on a futurist message board after his death, and he got an obituary in his hometown newspaper making elaborate claims (link now dead), plus one in a larger regional paper (which I only find on copyvio sites so I won't link) that says almost nothing about him except personal details - birth, death, occupation, family, services. Marked for want of notability since 2009. It fails WP:BIO, WP:AUTHOR. Claimed president of a non-accredited private 'college' that seems non-notable and would not contribute to his notability. There may be something out there I didn't find amidst all the other people of the same name, but I am not seeing anything that would merit coverage on Wikipedia. Essentially an orphan - the only pages pointing here are redirects and lists. Agricolae (talk) 14:12, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Agricolae (talk) 14:13, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. North America1000 10:54, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nosebagbear (talk) 13:04, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete I haven't been able to find anything to suggest that he qualifies under any notability guideline. The books he wrote do not appear to be notable, failing WP:AUTHOR, and there does not appear to be anything significant about the Kepler Academy he was president of, failing WP:NACADEMIC. Also failing WP:GNG in the sources. Hzh (talk) 18:12, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete - This weasel language filled hagiography does not show any notability as we see it. FWIW, I am an Episcopalian and have attended classes at the General Seminary. Bearian (talk) 23:07, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Verne Harnish[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG as WP:AUTHOR or businessman. @DGG: successfully nominated for deletion four years ago, and it was recreated within days. МандичкаYO 😜 23:00, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 23:15, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 23:15, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
Preliminary: this is considerably expanded over the previously-deleted article and needs to be judged in its own right. DGG ( talk ) 15:22, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep Passes WP:GNG. The article and sources has improved since its first creation. The consensus in the last AfD isn't very clear. Accesscrawl (talk) 09:41, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
Neutral after observing arguments. Accesscrawl (talk) 09:08, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 07:11, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  • delete Reluctant keep reluctant because I am biased against keeping articles promoting professional self-promoters on Wikipedia, and - a more policy-based argument - because so many of the sources on the page are Harnish writing about Harnish. Nevertheless, there are articles like Success a matter of habit [[22]], The Australian, 13 February 2007, a detailed profile from which a BLP can be sourced.E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:00, 12 August 2018 (UTC)Withdraw. I am no longer certain that sources I took to be independent of the subject actually are, and I do have concerns about a page that is instantly resurrected after being deleted as WP:PROMO. Changing iVote to "d".E.M.Gregory (talk) 09:35, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete. self-promotion, which is a reason to delete regardless of notability DGG ( talk ) 04:37, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
Not sure it's self promotion, he just writes a lot of articles, going back 20+ years, and as you point out it's considerably expanded from the previously deleted article. Tekkamakii (talk) 13:42, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep. Took out any fluff/selfpromotion - should still meet GNG, between WP:Author and EO, but, yeesh, he writes a lot of articles. Didn't see the resurrection E.M.Gregory saw; doesn't look to have been deleted in the past? Going to review the sources you flagged next. Tekkamakii (talk) 15:37, 15 August 2018 (UTC)Tekkamakii (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
You have to provide best sources you have when notability is disputed by other editors. Accesscrawl (talk) 09:18, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
Updating a few now. Tekkamakii (talk) 13:42, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep That person is notable by all means while the page itself was poorly written . The article was written primarily to promote the subject itself, rather than being informative. I have taken out almost all the fluff, reduced promotional tone, removed references published by the subject himself or unreliable ones. Now that all the references in the current version truly indicate the subject's notability, I'd argue the nominator and editors to take a second look. Harnish, for example, was covered significantly by Forbes [1], CNN Money [2], HuffPost[3] [4], The Sydney Morning Herald [5], Fast Company [6], Business Insider. [7] Sillva1 (talk) 20:13, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep (disclaimer: article creator), per Sillva1 and their work on the article. ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:19, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep I am struggling to see anything that leads me to believe the article's creator has a close connection with the subject. The article seems to have been heavily edited for its tone and I would really say it is neutral and doesn't have any agrandising peacock statements. If I may I would like to go over all the references just to double check there is nothing hyper-promotional in there, there certainly shouldn't be any links to sales pages on amazon, especially when a quick search on highbeam reveals more than enough coverage from reputable sources.Cr@Z Kit-Kat Lovert@lk 11:54, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 11:26, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep the person seems notable if we see only references.--Mykanah (talk) 12:36, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Mel Thompson[edit]

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

Non-notable author, fails WP:AUTHOR and WP:GNG. Not cited by peers, did not originate a significant new concept, and there's no works, articles, or reliably-sourced reviews based on his books that I can find. The link padding in the article is a YouTube video, his personal website, the website of the Little Baddow History Centre which he personally administers, and some refs that simply list the books he's written. None of his work has been discussed in any reliable secondary sources that I can find. Article may be a mix of WP:PROMOTIONAL and WP:COI but that's just a guess on my part. Amsgearing (talk) 20:37, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Gameinfirmary (talk) 21:37, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. Gameinfirmary (talk) 21:37, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Gameinfirmary (talk) 21:37, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Warm Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 12:00, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep Article does need cleanup/improvement. I did nothing more than add 4 or 5 reviews in major, general-circulation periodicals to one of his books, Philosophers Behaving Badly (2005). He passes WP:AUTHOR.E.M.Gregory (talk) 23:09, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 06:07, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Krzysztof Konopka[edit]

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

The two books of this author are published by a e-publishing website run by a journalist and all references are either from this website or from promotional activities to push these books. There are no independent sources to establish notability. Staszek Lem (talk) 16:53, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Gameinfirmary (talk) 16:55, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Gameinfirmary (talk) 16:55, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Gameinfirmary (talk) 16:55, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. Gameinfirmary (talk) 16:55, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep Many famous authors financed their books and it is nothing bad. E-Literaci is a literary portal, not the e-publishing portal. It is a website for poets. They publish their poems, especially in anthologies. But the publisher of first two book written by Krzysztof Konopka is Barbara Mazurkiewicz, who is a journalist, poet and publisher. She is a well-known poet and has received many prestigious awards. Krzysztof Konopka's book are famous, because he was very young when he published his first book. But he wrote many other books. In 2018 his new book will have a premiere and the publisher is not E-Literaci, but big publishing house. Krzysztof Konopka as a young author has difficulty publishing books in large publishing houses, because they publish books written by famous authors. But many people read his books. There are other reviews in the Internet. People should give him a chance. His book are very important and a lot of people know it. And there are a lot of independent sources to establish notability. The user who wants to delete the article is not objective.GertaGreen 22:20, 03 September 2018 (UTC)
    • Comment This is a newly created user with an obvious WP:COI who is yet to understand how wikipedia works. Staszek Lem (talk) 21:22, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment I do not read Polish, but it's worth noting that half the sources given appear to be user forum links rather than independent sources. 96.127.244.201 (talk) 03:52, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
  • There are a lot of results in GBooks for "Krzysztof Konopka", but they seem to be about another person or other persons as they were published before (often more than a decade before) 2015. I think there might be a notable photographer with this name. A search for "Krzysztof Konopka"+2015 or +2016 doesn't bring up anything in GBooks that would satisfy GNG. James500 (talk) 04:44, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep Books of this author are real. They are in Polish National Library and Jagiellonian Library like other books. And they are in many libraries in Poland, I checked that. It is difficult to find informations about Krzysztof Konopka in Google, because there are a lot of people with the same name. This page should not be deleted, because it is notable. Antek.antek9710:20, 04 September 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 16:56, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 01:14, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete: I cannot find sourcing to show the subject meets WP:GNG. There isn't even an article on the Polish wikipedia on this person. It may seem cool to have a wikipedia article about yourself when you are 18, but BLPs like this can always backfire. This is the only policy based !vote since the nomination.--Milowenthasspoken 19:12, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete Nom and Milowent have this article, and subject's notability, pegged.E.M.Gregory (talk) 23:07, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Tito Perdue[edit]

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

Non-notable author/white supremacist. Scaleshombre (talk) 01:09, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Alabama-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 03:05, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 03:05, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment this article was nominated for deletion (AfD) not even two months ago and the result was "keep". Not sure how anything would have changed between now and then, but notability is not temporary in any case. Tillerh11 (talk) 17:03, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:12, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 06:45, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep And WP:TROUT Nom for ignoring that AfD. I came upon this one going though the AUTHORS AfD; The discussion looked like a slam dunk delte. Nevertheless, I did as I usually do with authors and ran him through a proquest news archive search (I find starting with the search more efficient than startin by reading all the comments; which often look different after I've seen what comes up in a search,) and... WOW! His books were extremely widely reviewed. That was when I noticed User:Tillerh11's comment and the recent AfD. As editors weighing in there stated, the reviews are dispositive.E.M.Gregory (talk) 22:02, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Joshua Levy[edit]

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

WP:BLP of a writer, who doesn't have a strong claim of notability under WP:AUTHOR or particularly strong reliable source coverage to carry a WP:GNG pass. He's the bylined creator, not the subject, of 10 of the 12 footnotes, and one more is his "our contributors" note in the general episode preview of one of the first ten — but, as always, writers do not get over our notability standards by being the creators of coverage about other things, they get over our notability standards by being the subject of coverage written by other people. Which means the only source here that isn't a complete non-starter in terms of establishing his notability is #4, "Montreal is in my DNA" — but that piece of coverage is from the same media outlet that hired him for the closest thing to an actual notability claim here, which means it isn't independent of him for the purposes of helping him get over GNG. All of which means that nothing here is enough to deem him notable. Bearcat (talk) 17:42, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Quebec-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 17:45, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 17:45, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep while I did not approve this page through AfC I did comment "My gut says he is notable. He is certainly prolific and funded by the CBC is impressive. Anything that can be added where other people talk about him and his work would be very helpful to establish notability" This is just a new stub and can be expanded. There are many pages in AfC that are far more worthy of deletion then this page. Legacypac (talk) 17:58, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
Notability is not demonstrated by how prolific a person is, it's demonstrated by how much attention he does or doesn't receive as the subject of coverage, and an individual CBC station in a media market is not the same thing as the national network. Bearcat (talk) 20:38, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment I kept this during a round of G13 tagging. Pinging User:Chetsford as the one who accepted the draft. -- » Shadowowl | talk 18:11, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete a non-notable poet.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:06, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep (ed updated below) For full disclosure, I passed this through AfC. That said, when I passed it I did feel it was right on the edge, so I can appreciate the position of the Delete !votes. I ultimately felt it was worthy of mainspace under criteria 1 (award of significance or multiple nominations for significant awards) for WP:ANYBIO on the basis of (a) being the CBC Montreal / Quebec Writers' Federation writer in residence, and, (b) being on the CBC national 2017 non-fiction longlist [23] in combination with the Montreal International Poetry Prize longlist [24]. While the former ("a") is not exactly the Pulitzer Prize or the Man Booker Award, we seem to accept penultimate regional literary awards as being of significance based on the fact that many of the state poet laureates are notable only for being a state poet laureate. That said, I am aware this veers sharply into the realm of WP:OTHERTHINGS, on which basis I'm giving this only a weak keep (in fact, the weakest keep). Chetsford (talk) 05:30, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 16:48, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete probably just WP:TOOSOON. this writer is widely published, but we need SECONDARY sources that are about his work, or his life. Or a major prize.E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:09, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 09:00, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 13:28, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete. No apparent significant critical reviews of his work. DGG ( talk ) 01:53, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom, prior comments and lack of notable examples of his work. Redditaddict_6_9 02:50, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete Borderline... but we shouldn't be keeping borderline BLP . Agree this may be case of WP:TOOSOON. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ammarpad (talkcontribs) 18 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep per Chetsford. -- Gprscrippers (talk) 16:53, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Please look at WP:AUTHOR. What we look for are things like book reviews, prizes, and INDEPTH coverage of the writer or her/his work. Levy has none of this.E.M.Gregory (talk) 10:28, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Neutral While I believed the CBC Montreal / Quebec Writers' Federation writer in residence and the CBC longlist qualified under NAUTHOR's inherent notability for multiple prizes, in reading the above discussion, and E.M.Gregory's comments, I am no longer convinced and am refactoring my !vote from Weak Keep to Neutral. Chetsford (talk) 03:33, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Note that the article is entirely PRIMARY sourced. Mostly sourced to short stories by Levy. There are also 2 segments wher ethe CBC "takes a listen to home recordings" and a Levy family recording is includes, plus "'Montreal is in my DNA': Meet Joshua Levy," introducing him as this year's writer-in-residence. We need SECONDARY.E.M.Gregory (talk) 11:11, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep. I believe Chetsford felt badgered into changing their vote. The subject accomplished a notable award (writer in residence at the CBC, Canada's national TV/radio network), has had their works reviewed, and certainly meets WP:GNG at the very least. Ifnord (talk) 16:47, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Although the CBC is a national network, Levy was not selected by the CBC Nationa,. He was selected by CBC Quebec. The 2017 CBC/QWF's 2017 writer-in-residence was Sarah Lolley [25]. As for reviews, I have found no reviews of his work. Published reviews are precisely the sort of thing that does help pass WP:AUTHOR. User:Ifnord, if you have found reviews, please bring to them to the page.E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:51, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tarun Sagar

Tools[edit]

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.