Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Authors
This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Authors. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.
- Adding a new AfD discussion
- Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
- Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
- You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Authors|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
- There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
- Removing a closed AfD discussion
- Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
- Other types of discussions
- You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Authors. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
- Further information
- For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.
watch |
For the general policy on the inclusion of individual people in Wikipedia, see WP:BIO.
Authors
[edit]- Marie Margaret Keesing (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Does not pass WP:ACADEMIC. Reasons given for notability are co-authoring books with husband. I understand it is difficult to know who is responsible for the written work in these circumstances, but I think co-authoring books that do not have their own article is a difficult justification for an article- I would suggest a merge with her Husband's article maybe (her husband is clearly notable as president of a learned body). I feel very bad about doing this, however, as obviously I do not want to underplay women's accomplishments in scientific fields. Spiralwidget (talk) 15:10, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: She's mentioned quite a bit in Gscholar [1] for example, but I suspect it was due to the era in which she lived and gender bias that "minimized" her contributions for lack of a better term. The 50s and 60s was still early for female scientists to be taken as equals to males. Oaktree b (talk) 15:58, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: This paper from 2015 seems to give her a proper discussion [2]. I think she's notable. Oaktree b (talk) 15:59, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Keep I sympathise with the proposer's dilemma. Although in Wikipedia terms "president of a learned body" gives us an easy basis for declaring someone notable, the lasting impact of this couple, and the real reason they're notable, is the anthropology they did, and their written output, not the husband's post. We cannot tease apart who contributed how much. Given that we don't know their relative contributions, deciding to put her contribution in an article with his name just feels too old-fashioned and patriarchal, as well as very arbitrary. Also, from a practical perspective, if we were to merge, her life prior to her marriage wouldn't fit well in her husband's article, giving too much weight to things that aren't directly about him; we'd have to consider moving the new merged article to "Felix Maxwell Keeling and Marie Margaret Keeling" or something like that, but then we'd need redirects anyway, so what's the point? "Keep" has the benefit of being a simple outcome to an inseparable duo. Elemimele (talk) 16:17, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Women, Social science, England, New Zealand, California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, and Washington, D.C.. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:08, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. As the co-author of Elite Communication in Samoa and Taming Philippine Headhunters, both of which seem to be significant books (I'm seeing lots of published scholarly reviews online, despite the fact they were published a long time pre-internet), she surely meets WP:AUTHOR. Josh Milburn (talk) 20:53, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Khatuna Lagazidze (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
BLP of a political scientist of doubtful notability. The only source that might get it over the line is the biographical dictionary of Georgia, but that looks more like an online Who’s Who rather than a DNB. Mccapra (talk) 22:41, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Politics, and Georgia (country). Mccapra (talk) 22:41, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:21, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yury Antsiferov (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:NAUTHOR, WP:ANYBIO or WP:GNG. Sources in the article are not great in establishing notability and BEFORE does not prove otherwise. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 23:04, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Politicians, and Russia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:20, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Notability not apparent. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:44, 1 October 2024 (UTC).
- I am the author of the article, so my voice doesn't count here, but since I was mentioned in the comments, I would like to share my thoughts. Firstly, Antsiferov is mentioned in several articles (for example, in relation to the State Duma elections and the case involving the Kremlin's attempt to sue him), both of which are quite high-profile and have been covered by many reputable media outlets. Secondly, he is the author of well-known textbooks in Russia, which are used by students at elite Russian universities (MGIMO, MSU). Madrugador88 (talk) 08:36, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Madrugador88 Oh your voice does count please, that's not how it works. The relationship to the State Duma elections and the case involving the Kremlin's attempt to sue him did not provide sufficient coverage to pass GNG. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:43, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Mong-Lan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This article looks like an autobiography, with all references from her website. Not sure if this person meets WP:GNG. Cherry Cotton Candy (talk) 13:09, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Women, Poetry, and Vietnam. Cherry Cotton Candy (talk) 13:09, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Bands and musicians, Dance, Arizona, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:09, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and Visual arts. Netherzone (talk) 22:57, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - at first glance she appears notable, but I will look deeper into the sources, as well as potential sources in a BEFORE search within the next few days before iVoting. It appears there are several SPA's who have worked on the article, however, that may or may not mean it's an autobio, which while strongly frowned upon, is not forbidden - if the person is notable. It may have influenced the neutrality of the article, so if it turns out that they meet notability criteria and the article is kept, it may need to be cleaned up. Netherzone (talk) 23:02, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- Jonathan Maxwell (businessman) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:ANYBIO or WP:GNG. Sources are not great in terms of coverage. A cursory search does not prove otherwise. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 17:20, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Environment, and United Kingdom. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 17:49, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:54, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- Vedprakash Dongaonkar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:NPROF, WP:WRITER or WP:ANYBIO. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:56, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and India. Shellwood (talk) 16:04, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Fails WP:PROF as in a non-notable position. Fails WP:GNG as no significant coverage sources were found, and WP:AUTHOR as the books are non-notable. In my view, it does not meet any notability criteria. GrabUp - Talk 16:12, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Does not meet WP:GNG, WP:PROF, as there isn't even a single reliable reference to support his significance. Dcotos (talk) 16:44, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Maharashtra. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 17:59, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Fails WP:NPROF and WP:NBIO. Subject has not made a significant achievement nationally or internationally worthy of notice to have a page warranted on. RangersRus (talk) 14:45, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- James Wise (businessman) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:ANYBIO or WP:GNG. Sources are not great in terms of coverage. The wedding coverage fails WP:SIGCOV. Every other source (like this, this, or this) from the article critically fails WP:SIGCOV. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 17:17, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. The coverage is too slight to establish notability. JSFarman (talk) 02:24, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Businesspeople, and England. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 17:58, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- Jonny Griffiths (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Mathematician who self-publishes by the looks of it. Fails WP:SIGCOV. UPE. Fails WP:BIO. Its likely him. scope_creepTalk 14:16, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Bands and musicians, Mathematics, and England. Skynxnex (talk) 14:28, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Wow, that's a lot of Lulu.com books. It's conceivable in principle that a self-published book could be article-worthy in its own right or contribute to the article-worthiness of the author if it were well-reviewed, but so far I haven't found any indications of that happening here. XOR'easter (talk) 23:41, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- Lilia Tarawa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
WP:BLP1E only notable in regards to Gloriavale. Most of the stuff not in regards to Gloriavale are from promotional pieces and Tarawa herself. Traumnovelle (talk) 20:36, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Most of the sources are neither reliable nor independent. They are full of primary sources written by the subject or from unreliable blogs. Ibjaja055 (talk) 21:37, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Christianity, and New Zealand. Traumnovelle (talk) 20:36, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Women. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 21:13, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep There's enough here to show GNG. She's written a book that Martin van Beynen has called "bestselling". It created a lot of publicity, for example, John Campbell interviewed her for 10 min on Radio New Zealand. She gets keynote speaking slots and, whilst that's nothing unusual, it is unusual when Stuff reports on that. She's been invited to give a talk at TEDxChristchurch and it takes quite something to get invited to TEDx. The pieces by Kurt Bayer (NZHerald; based in Christchurch), Eleanor Black (Stuff), and Now to Love (which belongs to Are Media) go into plenty enough depth to fulfil the criteria of three independent reliable sources. And all those sources are in the article already. All up, that's an easy keep. Schwede66 04:23, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- The Waikato Times piece is a promotional piece for the business awards. The Now to Love piece is just her interview with Women's Daily. The other Stuff piece is also a promotional piece.
- This is the same for most of the refs, they're either promo pieces or interviews about Gloriavale. Traumnovelle (talk) 06:20, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- Ram Krishna Bantawa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Very promotional article that doesn't meet WP:NAUTHOR and WP:SIGCOV. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 05:53, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Literature, and Nepal. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 05:54, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- Ravieshwar Singh (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Doesn't meet WP:GNG. It's just the blatant non adherence to the reviewer's comment/decline reason by the page creator/submitter. If we are considering the sources, they are mostly WP:SELFPUB. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 22:07, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Actors and filmmakers, Authors, Businesspeople, Entertainment, Fashion, and United States of America. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 22:08, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio, Law, India, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:13, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - not notable, self-published sourcing, and editor has not taken into account advice. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 05:06, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - editor corrected TV Guide link, author published through reputable sources (not blogs), many citations to his work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1017:B837:8C03:E011:E929:8629:EFF (talk) 16:06, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - not notable. If it is kept then "Rgs21" should clarify if they have any link to Ravi Guru Singh, the nickname of the article subject. Ttwaring (talk) 17:28, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - substantively this page has more citations and support than many other notability pages. Rgs21 may be on vacation or unavailable and the page should not hinge on that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.101.114.12 (talk) 15:18, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - almost entirely self-published sources. A lawyer or writer is famous for writing; they are not notable for that. One can make yourself famous; to become notable requires other people writing about you. See WP:GNG. Bearian (talk) 08:48, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - I reviewed, the people writing about the subject include Marc Bain at the Business of Fashion (extensively), Divya Bhandari at the Hindu (extensively -- on the digital fashion and the future for India) -- articles are behind paywalls. To a lesser extent, the subject is written about and cited in other law.com articles on decentralized autonomous organizations, by the author Robert Schwinger, a prominent partner at Norton Rose Fulbright, an elite law firm. The Business of Fashion and the Hindu, are credible, reputable and independent sources. Please advise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.85.105.72 (talk) 15:27, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Klaus Schnellenkamp (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Request for deletion of the Wikipedia article about Klaus Schnellenkamp due to lack of relevance according to the WP guidelines. These state that public reporting on the person in question must be independent of time or over a long period of time. However, there was only selective reporting, and this was done around 15 years ago. Hence the deletion request!KSW72 (talk) 07:31, 28 September 2024 (UTC)KSWKSW72 (talk) 07:31, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Germany, and Chile. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 08:02, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- Diane Hamilton (behavioral specialist) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Entirely promo Amigao (talk) 19:12, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Women, Behavioural science, and Arizona. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:09, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Self-promotional autobiography. I blocked the creator for promotional username and promotional edits. Cullen328 (talk) 02:31, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Quite so, thank you Cullen328. Axad12 (talk) 02:33, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per everyone above. The article is a promotional bio of a non-notable subject. Best, GPL93 (talk) 15:12, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- Tendai Ruben Mbofana (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:SIGCOV. Refs are WP:SPS and paid PR. No indication of significance. Fails WP:BIO scope_creepTalk 19:47, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Journalism, Politics, and Zimbabwe. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:08, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- Roberto G. Carbone (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Article about a person that doesn't meet WP:GNG. The first source is a database result as well as unverifiable. The second sources was like that too. The third one, embt.org, is solely a tribute to another man called "Alberto", and has nothing to do with this article. Source 5 is undoubtedly unreliable, and source 6 is a WP:PRIMARYSOURCE (because it's written by him, I would call it a WP:SELFPUB. ORCID isn't needful especially when citing as a biographical information. I don't know much about it, but it does appear like a user generated site. I was thinking how we can structure a person's research as academics always write many publications. On this aspect, there are many primary sources; books written by him, and thy are from source 9 to 11. Primary sources may be useful and good, but at the same time doesn't tell us how notable was that research. WA it reviewed by critics, did it appear on TV sites, e.t.c.
The subject's co-authored work, and his first book according to the article, doesn't appear to meet WP:NBOOK. This is applicable to the third (there was no mention of the second book). A Fellow of the American College of CHEST Physicians isn't notable per WP:NACADEMIC as the membership including non elected paid position is shown here. Same as the American Heart Association. Additionally, a letter of recommendation on someone doesn't show his notable that person is, and it isn't an award per WP:ANYBIO. This was accepted via AFC by me, for the sale of this AFD. The creator is likely a COI editor who has moved this page twice, and it has been draftified twice too. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 22:38, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Authors, Literature, Education, Science, and Italy. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 22:40, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Low GS citations in a very high cited field. Xxanthippe (talk) 23:16, 27 September 2024 (UTC).
- Comment ORCID's mean nothing with regards to notability. I have one, you can register for one, for free. We were encouraged at one point to register for one with our Wikipedia credentials... Not sure how useful it is, but it doesn't help notability. Oaktree b (talk) 00:41, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete I tend to agree with the explanation above, doesn't seem to have gained recognition in the field yet due to the low citation index. Oaktree b (talk) 14:27, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: Based on the changes I have reported and the previous scientific material collected, I completely disagree with your opinion that the Roberto G. Carbone page is not worthy of being published on Wikipedia English.
- By reading your criticisms and opinions, you are asked to evaluate the page according to the scientific criteria already adopted with other biographical pages of more or less famous scientists that I have taken as a comparison to evaluate the validity of the page and the sources cited by me.
- Please remember that there are many sources from English scientific societies that cannot be considered unreliable. I would also like to point out that many of the secondary sources cannot be cited as they do not exist on the web but only physically in paper format (for example scientific magazines, local newspapers, independent information). I therefore ask you to let me know how I can possibly insert this additional data.
- It is recommended to use international scientific criteria to evaluate the quality and scientific impact of the research carried out by Dr. Roberto G. Carbone with those who have the appropriate scientific requirements.
- Last revision:
- The English Wikipedia version is much more accurate than the Italian one. In detail, in the introduction I have added more accurate information regarding the scientific studies and the collaboration of Roberto G. Carbone's closest colleagues.
- I added in the "Research" section the close collaboration with the Nobel Prize winner Prof. Renato Dulbecco in the physiology of lung cancer.
- I added a quote with the photograph of the current president of the Royal Society Medicine who recommended that I write as a courtesy that Roberto G. Carbone is honored to be a member of the Royal Society Medicine.
- Finally I added the appointment of Roberto G. Carbone to the editorial board of the scientific journal The Lancet by the Editor. Rolando8891 (talk) 16:07, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, per discussion above by Rolando8891. Jeffrey Beall (talk) 20:45, 28 September 2024 (UTC).
- Delete. Citation record does not look like a pass of WP:NPROF C1. Editorial board membership is WP:MILL, and does not contribute to notability. The fellowships in the Royal College and in CHEST appear to be based in large part on ability to pay, to be open to early career researchers, and in general not to be the kind of thing discussed by NPROF C3. Fellowship in American Heart Association failed WP:V. Little sign of GNG notability. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 09:52, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- Eduard Dorneanu (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Created as a draft which was declined twice and then moved to mainspace by the draft creator, who restored it to mainspace after it had been draftified again. I have cleaned it up pretty extensively and looked for better sources, but I can't see how WP:NAUTHOR or WP:GNG are met – it looks like a case of an up-and-coming writer who is not yet notable. The single possibly independent source in the article (other than all the sources that don't mention Dorneanu) gives me a warning so I have not assessed that, but one source would not be sufficient in any case. A WP:BEFORE search yields nothing. bonadea contributions talk 12:57, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Poetry, and Romania. bonadea contributions talk 12:57, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Fails WP:TOOSOON. Maybe in a few years he'll be notable. - Sumanuil. (talk to me) 05:43, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Does not meet WP:GNG. Ktkvtsh (talk) 17:04, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- Carmelo Strano (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I'm not finding this professor and art critic notable per WP:Nacademic nor WP:NAUTHOR. The current sourcing consists of two press releases and a listing that is a simple name check. Part of a group of articles created to promote the "Empathic Movement". Netherzone (talk) 03:30, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Artists, Authors, Philosophy, and Visual arts. Netherzone (talk) 03:30, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: As per nom. Axad12 (talk) 03:38, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. GS citations are tiny. Xxanthippe (talk) 05:56, 27 September 2024 (UTC).
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:25, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- Tracey Collins (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This is a low-profile individual who is not notable. Notability is WP:NOTINHERITED from her famous boyfriend. "de facto first lady of NYC" is not a factoid that confers notability. The NYT piece cited is a brief mention of her, and the WP:NYPOST source is unreliable for U.S. politics. WP:BEFORE produced only this in addition. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:02, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politics, and New York. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:02, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom or merge to Eric_Adams#Personal_life, these souces do not justify a separate article since she does not have even an informal public role. Reywas92Talk 17:33, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep I see a NY Post article with her as the main focus as well as a People article and a few others. Sure, this page is going to be brief but it's still notable enough to keep. Nweil (talk) 17:53, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- I commented on those. They do not establish notability. Have you seen WP:NYPOST?
There is consensus the New York Post is generally unreliable for factual reporting, especially with regard to politics, particularly New York City politics. A tabloid newspaper, editors criticise its lack of concern for fact-checking or corrections, including examples of outright fabrication. Editors consider the New York Post more reliable before it changed ownership in 1976, and particularly unreliable for coverage involving the New York City Police Department. A 2024 RfC concluded that the New York Post is marginally reliable for entertainment coverage; see below.
– Muboshgu (talk) 17:58, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not positive the subject of Tracey Collins falls under "politics". You said yourself she is a low-profile individual. I get that this is all tangentially related to politics but the tone of that article does not seem slanted or biased in a political way. I think the RfC does not apply here. Nweil (talk) 18:08, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Neither the NY Post nor People would have published those if not for her relationship to Eric Adams, hence NOTINHERITED and the connection to NYC politics. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:24, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- You’re Crystal Balling with that claim. An alternate timeline is unknowable. The point is that they were written. Nweil (talk) 05:41, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- Written in relation to Adams. It's not crystal balling to say she'd remain low profile without the relationship. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:51, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- You’re Crystal Balling with that claim. An alternate timeline is unknowable. The point is that they were written. Nweil (talk) 05:41, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- I commented on those. They do not establish notability. Have you seen WP:NYPOST?
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Women, and Louisiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:10, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:11, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to Eric Adams. An article about a person is an article about a person, even if the motivation for writing the article was the person's relationship. NOTINHERITED isn't about discrediting sourcing about that person, but discrediting the idea that someone is automatically notable for their relationship. That said, there's just not enough sources about Collins directly to support WP:BIO at this point. Add to that the ongoing legal issues around Adams will likely mean this bio will run into WP:BLPCRIME issues, and I think it makes sense to just redirect here. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 15:43, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete “per nom or merge to Eric_Adams#Personal_life … since she does not have even an informal public role,” per Reywas92. The New York Post is a tabloid notorious for its headlines and isn’t a reliable source for such purposes: “ There is consensus that the New York Post … are considered to be marginally reliable sources for entertainment coverage, including reviews, but should not be used for controversial statements related to living persons.” I also want to remind you all of a longtime precedent that we almost always delete articles about education administrators. If we keep this, we either need a crispy clear change of consensus, or we need to address the issues that would be raised. Please don’t go there. Bearian (talk) 18:00, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Every article about her is directly tied to her relationship with Adams. Hiphopsavedmylife (talk) 18:21, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The mayor of New York City is the most prominent mayoral position in the United States. The spouse/partner of the mayor is treated like that of a state's governor. Have there been discussions about the notability of a governor's significant other? I would apply them to the First Lady of NYC if so. Thriley (talk) 20:16, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- The significant others of Rudy Giuliani and Michael Bloomberg were not treated akin to first ladies of a state. De Blasio's wife, Chirlane McCray, has independent sourcing directly about her, not her husband. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:50, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- I disagree. The New York press has historically covered the First Lady of New York with the same interest as if she were the wife of the governor of New York State. Thriley (talk) 23:01, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- And yet, we don't see evidence of that with RS going into Collins as a person, just passing mentions in articles about Adams. McCray served in the role, Collins has avoided it, it would seem. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:09, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- If I were to guess, she has been deliberately low profile during his administration due to the concerns raised during the campaign. Thriley (talk) 23:14, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- And yet, we don't see evidence of that with RS going into Collins as a person, just passing mentions in articles about Adams. McCray served in the role, Collins has avoided it, it would seem. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:09, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- I disagree. The New York press has historically covered the First Lady of New York with the same interest as if she were the wife of the governor of New York State. Thriley (talk) 23:01, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- The significant others of Rudy Giuliani and Michael Bloomberg were not treated akin to first ladies of a state. De Blasio's wife, Chirlane McCray, has independent sourcing directly about her, not her husband. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:50, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- Steven Ujifusa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Tried draftfying this, and it was more or less immediately put back in mainspace. Tried find independent, and I couldn't find any. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 19:09, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Authors. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 19:09, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. The article is not written in correct format, and the author is clearly the subject (check username).
- TheMotto (talk) 19:18, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Slightly off topic but can I request some eyes on this article [3] which the same author created 18 minutes before creating his own article. Google suggests some connection between author and subject. Axad12 (talk) 02:44, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, New York, and Pennsylvania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:18, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as per nom. Axad12 (talk) 02:45, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. I added 17 reviews of his three books to the article, many of them reliably published in a mix of major newspapers and academic journals. There's easily enough for WP:AUTHOR here, even if we don't count the more-routine Publishers Weekly and Kirkus reviews. I don't know what the nominator tried but finding several of these took only plugging his name into Google News. As for formatting, see WP:DINC, but User:XOR'easter seems to have already done much of the necessary cleanup soon after the deletion nomination was made. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:27, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per above. Josh Milburn (talk) 07:03, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per found sources. Geschichte (talk) 08:19, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- I refuse to !vote to avoid encouraging anybody from using this platform as a free web host to draft an autobiography. He might be notable, but this creates a terrible precedent. Bearian (talk) 17:30, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- Just as we should not allow indiscriminate creation of autobiographies, we should not distort our content by letting the bad creation of an article on a notable subject prevent us from having an article on that subject. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:06, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- Menotti Lerro (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
All right, I'll bite, this article is probably not notable. The refbombing makes it really hard to assess the quality of the sources, but even then, it seems most coverage is either WP:ROUTINE or about the movement he founded, empathism. Allan Nonymous (talk) 12:50, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Poetry and Italy. Allan Nonymous (talk) 12:50, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:51, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per @Netherzone. Tavantius (talk) 16:16, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note that the previous deletion discussion (here [4]) is informative as per source quality. I would additionally suggest salting. Allan Nonymous (talk) 13:28, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - Many of the sources are local, and many are written by followers/adherents/members of his so-called "cultural movement", Empathism, who have signed his "manifesto", therefore are not independent.
- Netherzone (talk) 16:14, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and Visual arts. Netherzone (talk) 15:55, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - As I'm slogging through the 94 ref-bombed citations I am finding that many of these sources are user-submitted content, blogs, things written by his Empathism adherents and members, and some sources don't mention him at all. The article is bloated with content supported in this way, and I do not think it should remain in the encyclopedia, per WP:PROMO by the two now-blocked sockpuppets (see: [5] and [6]). Also WP:TNT, and WP:NOTADVERTISING may apply. Netherzone (talk) 22:05, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. For full disclosure I was recently heavily involved in both the ANI thread and the SPI which resulted in the socks being blocked. However, I agree with the positions taken by Allan Nonymous and Netherzone above. The fact that the equivalent article was deleted on Italian Wikipedia on notability grounds is, I suspect, a relevant consideration here. Axad12 (talk) 03:28, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete — maybe if this were started from scratch by impartial editors it could amount to something, but as things stand, it’s irremediably tainted by promotional spam. — Biruitorul Talk 12:36, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
|
- Delete Seems to be a WP:TNT case right enough. I thought because he was poet but looked at a whole bunch of the references (not the whole first block though) and seems to be non-notable. Which is unfortunate really. If it wasn't empathism and the concerted effort to stuff it full of crap along with the several articles I came across mentioning the term during NPP sprint, I suspect there could be enough for a wee stub as a poet. These directed action gangs on here turn a lot of people off. Its unfortunate. scope_creepTalk 10:19, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:TNT. It’s so poorly written, designed, formatted, and duplicative (especially references) that, even if an argument could be made that he’s notable, the article would have to be written from scratch. If the subject paid for this crap, then he was scammed. Bearian (talk) 19:15, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Wow, Cambridge Scholars Publishing. That takes me back. Anyway, this is a heap of vanispamcruftisement. XOR'easter (talk) 00:06, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- I thought Cambridge Scholars Pub. seemed a slightly dodgy. Thanks for that link. Netherzone (talk) 00:13, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Brock Frost (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Semi-advertorialized rticle about a city councillor, not properly referenced as having any strong claim to passing WP:NPOL #2. As always, city councillors are not automatically notable enough for Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to show evidence that they should be seen as special cases of significantly more nationalized notability than the norm -- but this is showing nothing of the sort, and instead is trending in the direction of trying to promote his post-council business as a mortgage agent, and is referenced entirely to the type of run of the mill local coverage that's merely expected to always exist for all city councillors in their local media, except for a single brief glancing namecheck of his existence in a national newspaper article about somebody else, which isn't support for notability and doesn't even support the sentence it's footnoting anyway.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to have a lot more sourcing and substance than this. Bearcat (talk) 06:52, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 06:52, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:53, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete or Redirect to Cornwall River Kings. Per nom. Bkissin (talk) 14:29, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- I don't particularly think a redirect to the hockey team is needed. Despite the article saying that he "is" the owner of the team, he actually only owned it for a few months in 2014 before selling it to other owners again, so I don't think owning a minor hockey league team for a brief time 10 years ago is enough to warrant a redirect: he's not a terribly likely search term on that basis per se, and in the incredibly unlikely event that somebody was searching for his name on that basis, the team's article would come up in the list of search results anyway. Bearcat (talk) 15:50, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - he buys things and sells things. Many tens of thousands of people in North America do the same, including several of my family members who are not notable in any way. He owned a minor league hockey team for a few months: that’s not the big deal it’s asserted. I’m an hockey fan, FWIW. He is not automatically notable as a small city council member, as discussed above by Bearcat. Unless someone can find significant coverage of him in reliable sources, I don’t think he is otherwise notable. Bearian (talk) 19:32, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- Paul Boross (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Doesn't meet WP:CREATIVE with only minor roles in various TV and music. I can't find any sources getting close to discussing him. This is just the latest iteration in attempts to promote him as a speaker going back to 2014 (I've already removed that). SmartSE (talk) 08:07, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 09:36, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Television. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:52, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: No RS available which cover the topic significantly, to establish notability. Ratekreel (talk) 21:51, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect - the subject is not notable for doing any of his various endeavors, except for Morris Minor and the Majors. I won’t be broken up if it’s outright deleted, but a redirect is a reasonable option. Bearian (talk) 19:24, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- Gareth Ward (author) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:GNG, couldn't find much else online. GMH Melbourne (talk) 08:53, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Magic, Entertainment, and New Zealand. GMH Melbourne (talk) 08:53, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Yes, the article needs some work, but I believe the subject is notable. TheSwamphen (talk) 09:01, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Do you have any sources that could establish notability? GMH Melbourne (talk) 10:00, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep the two press sources in the article seem pretty good. There's also this, this, this, all from a quick and non extensive search. His books have several reviews on Gale and Proquest which help him pass WP:NAUTHOR/ Also many interviews with RS. A pretty decent article could be written here, IMO PARAKANYAA (talk) 12:48, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Sources identified above seem fine, we have some reviews of the body of work as well. Ok for AUTHOR notability. Oaktree b (talk) 15:58, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Per above. Ratekreel (talk) 21:47, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Laura M. Brotherson (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
lacks notability. ―Howard • 🌽33 21:48, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. ―Howard • 🌽33 21:48, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Women, Canada, Idaho, and Washington. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:26, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. I'm not finding any significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Run-of-the-mill sexuality/intimacy author. Softlavender (talk) 10:40, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Fails WP:AUTHOR. LibStar (talk) 13:47, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Delete per the nomination and subsequent discussion. Doesn’t meet WP:GNG. Go4thProsper (talk) 23:08, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- Peter J. Levesque (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No indication of significance. References are PR, profiles, appointment news and non-salient coverage. Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:BIO. UPE. scope_creepTalk 22:01, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Businesspeople, Hong Kong, United States of America, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Washington, D.C.. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:24, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: I don't find coverage about this person, Gnews has only PR items. He wrote a book "he Shipping Point: The Rise of China and The Future of Retail Supply Chain..." but I don't find any reviews. These appear to be republished articles [7], [8]. I don't see AUTHOR or business person notability. Oaktree b (talk) 01:00, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete for lack of significant coverage. All of the references cited are literally one page each. That’s fleeting, not significant. To be notable, an author needs articles about him and reviews of his books, not just the book itself. We are not a gazette of every business person and/or book author. It’s 2024, and while our readers might not know all of our policies, everyone knows that we don’t have an article about everyone ever mentioned in a newspaper. Bearian (talk) 18:46, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria, which says:
People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.
- If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability.
Sources
- "Transportation 2023: Peter Levesque". Virginia Business. 2023-08-30. Archived from the original on 2024-10-01. Retrieved 2024-10-01.
The article notes: "Levesque was previously president of Ports America and spent 25 years based in Hong Kong. He has held executive positions at international transportation, logistics and supply chain companies such as Modern Terminals, CEVA Logistics and DHL. ... A graduate of the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth, Northwestern University and the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Levesque authored “The Shipping Point: The Rise of China and the Future of Retail Supply Chain Management” in 2011, and the 2022 thriller “Two if By Sea,”"
- Kwang, Mary (2002-05-15). "What Singapore has done, HK can do too". The Straits Times.
The article notes: "Singapore has done a remarkable job of marketing itself as the logistics hub of Asia, and where Singapore has succeeded, Hongkong could succeed too, according to a logistics industry consultant. Mr Peter Levesque, who runs his own consultancy firm and who used to work for container transportation company, American President Lines, said that the Republic 'has its running shoes on and for quite some time in an attempt to outrun Hongkong'. ... He lauded Singapore for its focused marketing efforts, open-skies policy, world-class port, logistics education and positioning as a hub for high-value, fast-moving goods. He described the tie-up between the National University of Singapore and the Georgia Institute of Technology, renowned for logistics studies, to offer courses in the field as a strategic fit."
- Labrut, Michele (2019-11-26). "Ports America appoints Peter Levesque as president". Seatrade Maritime News. Archived from the original on 2024-10-01. Retrieved 2024-10-01.
The article notes: "Levesque will join Ports America in February 2020 and will report to Mark Montgomery, who will continue in the role of chief executive officer. Levesque joins Ports America from Modern Terminals Limited (MTL) in Hong Kong, where he most recently held the post of group managing director and ceo. He brings more than 30 years of maritime industry experience. During his nine-year tenure with Modern Terminals, Levesque led the company through a successful Public-Private-Partnership in Hong Kong."
- "Levesque leaves Hong Kong for Jersey". The Journal of Commerce. Vol. 20, no. 25. 2019-12-09. p. 8. EBSCOhost 140436136.
The article notes: "Ports America has chosen 30-year shipping industry veteran Peter Levesque as its new president, returning Levesque to the United States from Hong Kong, where he was CEO of Modern Terminals Ltd. Levesque, who has led Modern Terminals since 2016 and spent nine years at the company, will join Ports America in February. "
- Knowler, Greg (2016-08-02). "Levesque to succeed Kelly as head of Modern Terminals". The Journal of Commerce. EBSCOhost 117205752.
The article notes: "Modern Terminals' Chief Operating Officer Peter Levesque will succeed Sean Kelly as managing director of the Hong Kong-based terminal operator from Jan. 1, 2017. ... Levesque is a veteran of the transport and logistics industry. He has been with Modern Terminals since February 2010, and has served as chief commercial officer and chief operating officer. Prior to Modern Terminals, he held executive positions at DHL, CEVA Logistics, and American President Lines."
- Comment Lets examine these references as Cunard hasn't a particularly good success rate at finding sources for these types of articles:
- Ref 1 [9] This is profile with no byline. Its non-rs. Its is likely written by Levesque himself.
- Ref 2 This is 317 word article. It is NOT in-depth secondary coverage.
- Ref 3 [10] This routine annoucement of employment comes from a press-release and is not considered a WP:SECONDARY source for WP:BLP. It is non-rs in fact.
- Ref 4 This is the same press-release. Another routine annoucement of employement. It is non-rs.
- Ref 5 This is the same press-release. Another routine annoucement of employement. It is non-rs.
- None of these constitute WP:SECONDARY sources. I'm a bit peeved that press-releases have been presented as secondary sourcing when long established consensus has proven they are not. So far no WP:THREE secondary sources have been supplied to prove this person is notable. scope_creepTalk 10:29, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- The first source was not written by Levesque himself. It was written by the publication. Here is the methodology from the Virginia Business editor:
The second source reports on the subject's speech. The other sources provide biographical background about him in the context of the business roles he assumes. The coverage in all the sources is sufficient for him to meet Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria. Cunard (talk) 10:39, 1 October 2024 (UTC)For those who aren’t familiar with the Virginia 500, we like to say that it’s like the Fortune 500 but instead of companies, it’s about people — specifically, the most powerful Virginia executives and officials in business, nonprofits, higher education, government and politics. The list is based on our staff research, not nominations, and we do not rank executives.
...
Another important point: The Virginia 500 is journalism, not public relations or advertising. Our editors choose which organizations and leaders make the list and what we say about them. The Virginia 500 is not an award or an endorsement; it’s simply a recognition that a person holds a position of power and influence. Though most executives appreciate being named to the Virginia 500, a small number sometimes wish not to be included. There isn’t an opt-out process, however.
- The virginia busines reads looks and reads like a profile with fundamental information that couldn't be know without contacting him or using other press-release type information to build that profile. That combined with paid-for images makes it look like PR. Its the classic who's who or bloomberg type of profile. The 2nd isn't in-depth and the press-releases by long consensus are non-rs. You can't bypass it and tack and assume its good. Its not. scope_creepTalk 10:58, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- "fundamental information that couldn't be know without contacting him or using other press-release type information" could be said without evidence about most news articles in reliable sources that profile living people. Backed by the statement from the publication's editor, I see no evidence that this source is not independent. The second source is a 299-word article which is significant coverage. The other sources are not press releases; they are news articles from publications that report on the shipping industry. Cunard (talk) 11:11, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- They are from press-releases. Nobody reports on a routine annoucement of a job unless it comes from a press-release. You just don't want to do the work to find the press-release. Here is the press-release statement
- "“I am thrilled to have Peter be part of our leadership team of the Ports America platform. Ports America remains focused on providing best-in-class service to many of the world’s leading shipping lines as well as the work we have completed in improving workflow solutions to beneficial cargo owners to drive dramatic growth for the company,” said Ports America ceo Mark Montgomery".
- That is not independent and non-rs.
- The subject listing is similar to the X of Y articles that lists basic information and are no more that constructs used to provide awareness in job hunting and lately to build a fake notability, similar to bloomberg and who's who. It is no more than a profile, is not in-depth nor independent. The man is not notable. It worries me you break established consensus around reliabilty/independence just to prove a point. I'm kind of worried that you don't know that press-releases are non-rs. I hope your not handing out that advice for editors looking for sources. scope_creepTalk 12:25, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- The first source was not written by Levesque himself. It was written by the publication. Here is the methodology from the Virginia Business editor:
- Andrew Mangham (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Part of a walled garden revolving around “empathism”. No credible evidence of notability. Conveniently, Mangham is cited in the article on Menotti Lerro, the guru of empathism, calling him “one of the most interesting poets in modern-day Europe”. Of course, this opinion just happens to appear in the introduction to a volume of poetry by Lerro, who just happens to be friends with Mangham. See how these things work? Biruitorul Talk 11:03, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 12:18, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Mangham is pretty clearly notable as an academic, whether or not the article was created as part of a walled garden. His Science of Starving, for example, is from a major university press and was reviewed in (for example) Dickens Quarterly, Victorian Studies, and a German language journal. His Violent Women and Sensation Fiction, meanwhile, was reviewed in Women's Writing, Victorian Studies, and Medical History. Josh Milburn (talk) 15:16, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. I added the reviews linked above and several others to the article. They are easily enough for WP:AUTHOR, regardless of any connection to a questionable school. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:58, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- PS I removed the claim of being connected with empathism from the article. I don't think its source was adequate for WP:BLPRS. That leaves his professorial position and his books. Among edited volumes, I'm only listing the ones for which I found reviews, and for that reason the Lerro volume is not even listed. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:04, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:51, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I think this subject needs to be assessed according to ACADEMIC or AUTHOR standards of notability regardless of his connection to Menotti Lerro. Writing an introduction to one book doesn't define his career. Liz Read! Talk! 00:40, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- Slava Smelovsky (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
WP:BLP with zero real coverage. Refs are profiles, other work and oddments. Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:BIO. No indication of significance. scope_creepTalk 17:50, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Israel. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 18:23, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Journalism, and Psychology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:44, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: per nomination and WP:GNG. While on the surface Smelovsky does appear to have references about him, many of these do seem like profiles (16 being probably the easiest one to spot). SirMemeGod 19:55, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Sources 2,3,5,6,7 and 11 are red per Source Highlighter, so those are non-RS. I can only find social media, this person's website, streaming sites, then not much else. Zero hits/nothing turns up in gnews. I don't see musical notability. Oaktree b (talk) 00:57, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Merge (selectively) into Grundik+Slava as an WP:ATD. No need for an article on this musician since his individual notability is not established. The target does need more information and some info on the duo participants is legitimate. gidonb (talk) 15:17, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Fails WP:SIGCOV. 181.197.42.215 (talk) 05:14, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- Jens Hammer (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable "author" (blogger). Feels self-promotional. Lacks WP:RS, fails WP:GNG, WP:AUTHOR. Cabrils (talk) 02:20, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete promotional article of a non-notable figure Traumnovelle (talk) 02:25, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Military, Firearms, Internet, Alaska, and Oregon. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:30, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete In no way meets the WP:GNG or WP:NWRITER. Image was previously published by Hammer, so either it's copyvio or there's an obvious COI at play. Given the tone, could be either. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 02:44, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete fails WP:GNG. Sidenote: Is this the same person as the previous two Afds who seemed to be a porn actor? Mztourist (talk) 04:04, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per GreenLipstickLesbian's comment. APK hi :-) (talk) 04:19, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per everyone above. Best, GPL93 (talk) 14:15, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Brad Farmer (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
There has been a lot of IP nonsense in the history of this article, so while I agree with the IP's PROD, I think this merits an AFD. Farmer has been cited, but since OA isn't sufficient I don't see WP:BIO level coverage Star Mississippi 21:06, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Australia. Star Mississippi 21:06, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Environment. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:15, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Looking at the sources currently in the article there is borderline notability. Online I have also found quite a bit that can also contribute towards WP:GNG ([11][12][13][14]). I will add what I can to the article. GMH Melbourne (talk) 02:56, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I have semi'ed the article due to the blanking, but not this discussion. If someone feels I should not have done so as nom, feel free to amend. Star Mississippi 00:52, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:19, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Sources 3 and 4 in the comment above are good, in addition to the 3rd source in the article. Should be enough for GNG. Oaktree b (talk) 12:15, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- Sam Forster (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This is a vanity article for a little-known freelance writer. His only claim to fame is drawing widespread mockery and condemnation for his book about wearing blackface across the United States. Much more notable Canadian journalists do not have Wikipedia pages, and the achievements listed are negligible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TrashPandaMan (talk • contribs)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Journalism, and Canada. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 04:26, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
- Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 September 20. —cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 04:41, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - The person who nominated this article for deletion clearly has a personal issue with the subject, Sam Forster, who is obviously a notable public figure. Just because an author is controversial, like Sam Forster is, that doesn't mean a well-sourced article about him should be removed. Sam Forster seems like a fairly normal, likable journalist, who happened to create an avant-garde book, and it seems like he is being maliciously attacked here. Violetpennington (talk) 07:26, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
Keep - The critique overlooks the broader context of Sam Forster's contributions to the public discourse. While it's true that not every writer or journalist gains widespread recognition overnight, dismissing someone's work solely based on their level of fame or controversial moments is short-sighted. Forster’s book, which has indeed sparked debate, addresses sensitive and complex issues, and the ensuing reactions—both positive and negative—demonstrate that his work has provoked meaningful conversations.
It's essential to recognize that public figures who challenge societal norms often face harsh criticism, but that doesn't diminish the value of their contributions. Many notable figures throughout history were initially met with ridicule before their work was acknowledged as significant. Forster's willingness to tackle uncomfortable topics is an important part of his role as a writer. Furthermore, Wikipedia is a platform that reflects public interest, and Forster's coverage there simply mirrors the fact that his work, controversial or not, has sparked significant public attention.
Additionally, comparing Forster to other Canadian journalists based on fame is a false equivalence. The presence or absence of a Wikipedia page is not a measure of a person’s accomplishments, nor does it negate the relevance of their work. It's important to focus on the substance of what a writer has contributed to discussions, rather than focusing on how well-known they are or how their work has been received in certain circles.
---
This approach emphasizes the importance of intellectual discourse, the value of confronting complex societal issues, and challenges the assumptions about fame equating to worth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daves598 (talk • contribs) 01:15, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: Editor is now blocked. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 10:55, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
- The keep vote above by the blocked editor was entirely AI generated (according to gptzero.me), and on that basis should surely be entirely disregarded. Axad12 (talk) 03:09, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. We need some experienced editors to weigh in here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:54, 27 September 2024 (UTC)- Keep - There is no legitimate argument for deleting this article. Sam Forster is clearly a notable figure who has been featured in many prominent media outlets. The fact that some people have criticized his work is not a reason to delete his page. Violetpennington (talk) 07:19, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - like it or not, a quick Proquest search for "Sam Forster" find no end of coverage for his ... for lack of a better word, “mochaface”. Nfitz (talk) 01:40, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Abdullah Hashem (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
BLP of the founder of a religious sect. The sect itself appears to be notable but it does not seem that the leader himself is. I think a redirect to Ahmadi Religion of Peace and Light would probably be best. Mccapra (talk) 22:12, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Religion. Mccapra (talk) 22:12, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Egypt, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:17, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Google searches easily turn up hundreds of high-profile mentions. There are articles from Amnesty International, the UN, and various governments, and dozens of major newspapers that all mention him. Easily meets WP:BIO and WP:SIGCOV criteria. For sects with that many media mentions, their founders and leaders would usually also be notable enough. There is also plenty of information about Hashem that would fit well into a standalone article. DjembeDrums (talk) 17:46, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
- ok which three of these do you think provide the best in-depth coverage? Mccapra (talk) 21:49, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
Merge Article only cited one source almost which shows they still need to meet WP:GNG to stand alone Tesleemah (talk) 20:10, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: If merge, merge where?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 22:19, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
- Judith Mok (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Tagged for sourcing issues since 2006. Not clear the subject meets WP:GNG. 4meter4 (talk) 00:13, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Bands and musicians, Women, Poetry, Ireland, and Netherlands. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:05, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
Speedy Keep Finding sources was really easy for this person, they have multiple books with multiple reviews, and numerous interviews. I removed a lot of the material that I couldn't find sources for other than her website and CV. Dr vulpes (Talk) 03:57, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
- After rereading that I wanted to clarify that I'm not being snippy with @4meter4 I'm just so used to having to do deep dives into archives at AfD that this was a welcome change of pace. Dr vulpes (Talk) 04:09, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:49, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as a likely GNG failure. BLP written by the subject of the BLP. While the article has been improved over the years, the goals of our encyclopedia were so alien for the creator to not provide her date of birth. User:Dr_vulpes says there are multiple reviews. I did not see true reviews. Happy to be pointed to such, if in existence! I see articles about her books, in which she tells about these. Also interviews and passing mentions. The author is accessible - kudos to her - but it does not assist the independence of the sources. gidonb (talk) 12:54, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Jason Emer (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
1. It was moved from draft space to article space before it was reviewed and made live by the creator of the page
2. It was moved to draft space by other editors due to promotional tone, it seemed as it was written by someone closely connected to the subject
3. It was proposed for deletion and the final decision was to keep. However, the keep voters: 1 was a new account created just for this debate only (seems like it and it was an open IP, one was an editor banned for sock-puppetry)
4. There is someone constantly removing a section that is a bit negative about the subject
All this makes me believe that this page is being managed by someone closely connected to the subject. Additionally, i don't believe the subject is notable and most of the references are PRs and he is constantly self-promoting on the internet. WikiProCreate (talk) 13:49, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
- Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 September 17. —cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 14:12, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Appears to be a celebrity plastic surgeon [15], [16], [17]. I'm not sure any of these show notability. Discussion in AfD last time was also questioning the Academic notability, noting that 1000 citations was rather low for his field. I don't see that much has changed since the last AfD. Oaktree b (talk) 14:53, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: He's been investigated by a few regulatory bodies [18], which doesn't affect notability. This information has been added/removed, suggesting this page is being actively curated by editors, likely for promo purposes. Oaktree b (talk) 15:00, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Medicine, and United States of America. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:10, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, California, Illinois, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:54, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:13, 24 September 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:44, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Siue Moffat (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
WP:BLP of a cookbook author and filmmaker, not reliably sourced as having a strong claim to passing notability criteria for either occupation. As always, people are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to show evidence of WP:GNG-worthy coverage about them in media independent of themselves -- but the only notability claim on offer here is that her work exists, and the article is referenced to one (deadlinked but recoverable) short blurb that isn't enough to get her over GNG all by itself if it's all she's got for GNG-worthy coverage, and one primary source that isn't support for notability at all.
The article, further, has been tagged for needing more sources since 2011 without ever having better sources added, and a WP:BEFORE search came up dry as all I found in ProQuest was the blurb and a small handful of glancing namechecks of her existence in coverage of events.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to have more and better referencing than this. Bearcat (talk) 18:01, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Authors, and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 18:01, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Food and drink, Music, and Entertainment. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:36, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: I don't see any book reviews, or much of anything in sources otherwise. Nothing in news or a general Gsearch. Oaktree b (talk) 22:24, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
- I can see three reviews for "Lickin' the Beaters 2: Vegan Chocolate and Candy" via Proquest, but not much else. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 07:15, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
- At the very least, reviews exist for Lickin' the Beaters 2 from Library Journal [19] and Vegetarian Journal [20], and there are two shorter reviews for the two Lickin' the Beaters cookbooks from Broken Pencil magazine [21][22]. Broken Pencil also has a good number of reviews on her zines, e.g., one for The Day I Stopped Being Punk [23]. There's also an interview with her in Joe Biel's Beyond the Music: How Punks are Saving the World with DIY Ethics, Skills, & Values (Microcosm Publishing) on pages 150–152. With more research, I think we could probably find more reviews of her works that would warrant inclusion of this article (per WP:NAUTHOR). Best, Bridget (talk) 15:40, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 22:44, 23 September 2024 (UTC)- Yes a lot of reviews/mentions are before the internet existed as we know it. Broken Pencil reviewed all the zines, even some not listed on the wiki page. I've just found a Fascinating Folks from Broken Pencil (hopefully I'm doing this correctly, first time in one of these discussions... Maulydaft (talk) 13:48, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- I "vote" Not to Delete. To the article I added an example of the HeartaCk column (magazine defunct), an inclusion of Fascinating Folks in Broken Pencil, an interview with Boardwalk Chocolates with T.O.F.U Magazine. Bitch Magazine also highlighted Fascinating Folks in an article but Bitch is also defunct. Maulydaft (talk) 19:51, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - here's another review. Nfitz (talk) 01:35, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 05:48, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Sebastian Cluer (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
There doesn't appear to be significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. None of the links in the article help establish notability. toweli (talk) 09:04, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Authors, and Canada. toweli (talk) 09:04, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- This is a subjective opinion coming from a lack of awareness of Canada's television entertainment scene. Sebastian Cluer is one of the most well known and in-demand directors in his country, having directed, produced and developed many notable shows that have had massive success both in his home country and abroad. Lots of them are on airlines, including Still Standing, Bollywed, Property Brothers...and the list goes on. These along with receiving many nominations and wins, particularly with The Canadian Screen Awards, which are the country's equivalent to the Oscars and Golden Globes combined.
- Sebastian was also instrumental in the success of the hugely popular and successful show Kenny vs. Spenny and has been appearing in commentaries alongside Kenny Hotz as of late.
- IMDB Sebastian Cluer for further validation Cliuthar (talk) 15:06, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- That's fine, but we need sources about him. Simply being named in a list of nominees isn't enough for notability here. Oaktree b (talk) 23:01, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Article does need improvement, but there are far too many Gemini Award and Canadian Screen Award nominations and victories listed here to deem him "non-notable" at all. That's top-level national awards, equivalent to Emmys and Oscars, which is a notability lock even if the sourcing still needs improvement, and the sourcing for that kind of stuff most certainly can be improved. Bearcat (talk) 17:27, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- But there isn't any sourcing to be found. I agree he's notable, but having a permastub for lack of sourcing isn't what we look for. Oaktree b (talk) 23:02, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- "Is notable" and "delete" cannot coexist. Gemini Awards and Canadian Screen Awards are an inherent notability lock, meaning that every person with those awards on their mantle must be allowed to have a Wikipedia article. I'll grant that not everybody named in our Genie, Gemini and CSA articles already has an article yet, but everybody named in any of them must be allowed to have an article as soon as somebody gets around to it, and there can be no exceptions to that: it's a top-level national award that nails inherent notability to the wall right on its face per WP:ANYBIO's "The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times", which means it's inherently notable enough that it locks notability down even if the sourcing is inadequate. The only legitimate grounds for deleting a Gemini/Genie/CSA winner would be if sourceability were completely nonexistent (e.g. a person whose article falsely claimed a nomination or win that they didn't really have). Bearcat (talk) 17:08, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
- But there isn't any sourcing to be found. I agree he's notable, but having a permastub for lack of sourcing isn't what we look for. Oaktree b (talk) 23:02, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Nominations suggest notability, but there just isn't enough coverage about him. I had to dig to even bring this up [24]. An interview that doesn't quite help notability. Delete for lack of sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 23:00, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 13:47, 19 September 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 13:19, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
Authors proposed deletions
[edit]- Nazareth Hassan (via WP:PROD on 9 October 2023)