Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Arts and entertainment

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WikiProject Biography
General information
Announcements
Departments
Work groups and subprojects
Things you can do
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.

Biography (arts and entertainment) articles by quality and importance
Quality Importance
Top High Mid Low NA ??? Total
FA 8 17 40 81 3 149
FL 3 3 6
A 1 1 1 3
GA 10 37 84 412 70 613
B 51 151 419 1,287 2,988 4,896
C 18 169 775 7,217 2 15,800 23,981
Start 4 96 1,176 25,421 12 58,446 85,155
Stub 1 16 352 31,322 6 44,456 76,153
List 4 4 175 1 165 349
Category 22,010 22,010
Disambig 30 30
File 380 380
Project 8 8
Redirect 1 418 1,595 2,014
Template 908 908
NA 2 17 19
Other 1 13 53 67
Assessed 92 491 2,856 66,352 25,022 121,928 216,741
Unassessed 1 44 629 674
Total 92 491 2,857 66,396 25,022 122,557 217,415
WikiWork factors (?) ω = 994,510 Ω = 5.21


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)
  • Notability questioned:
  • FAC:
  • FAR:
    • none •
  • FARC:
    • none •
  • GA Noms:
  • Review:
    • none •
  • Article requests::
  • John_Buscema: There's a debate between the current version and this version - http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Buscema&oldid=181851662 - requesting input to arrive at a consensus integrating both versions.
  • Pierce O'Donnell — California's 22nd congressional district candidate[1] Los Angeles lawyer Buchwald v. Paramount screenwriter [2] author ISBN 1-56584-958-2 ISBN 0-385-41686-5 [3] California Fair Political Practices Commission[4][5][6][7]
  • William Ely Hill (1887-1962) - Illustrator, created artwork for the book covers for F. Scott Fitzgerald and had a regular entry in the New York tribune along with being published on numerous occasions.
  • Misc:

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. I am ready to work on the biography articles of Indian or Biography actors Jogesh 69 (talk) 15:00, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  2. come help with the Bronwen Mantel article Smith Jones 22:16, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Lovelaughterlife (talk · contribs) Worked extensively on some biographies; reverted vandalism some others
  4. Francoisalex2 (talk · contribs)
  5. Dovebyrd (talk · contribs)
  6. Artventure22 (talk · contribs)
  7. Truth in Comedy (talk · contribs)
  8. Warlordjohncarter (talk · contribs)
  9. DENAMAX (talk · contribs) Maxim Stoyalov
  10. Ozgod (talk · contribs)
  11. Eremeyv (talk · contribs)
  12. Susanlesch (talk · contribs), mostly inactive
  13. EraserGirl (talk) 03:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Shruti14 (talk · contribs) will help when I can
  15. 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.
  16. Jarhed (talk · contribs) 21:01, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Mvzix (talk · contribs)
  18. Cassianto (talk · contribs)
  19. Iamthecheese44 (talk · contribs)
  20. Georgiasouthernlynn (talk · contribs)
  21. Fitindia (talk · contribs)
  22. BabbaQ (talk · contribs)
  23. Woodstop45 (talk · contribs)
  24. Willthacheerleader18 (talk · contribs)
  25. The Eloquent Peasant (talk · contribs)
  26. Lopifalko (talk · contribs)
  27. Terasaface (talk) 03:31, 17 January 2020 (UTC) Working on BLP of artists primarily working in the fields of Studio craft[reply]
  28. Corachow (talk · contribs)
  29. Yorubaja (talk · contribs) 14:23:20, 18 January 2021 (UTC) [reply]
  30. Ms Kabintie (talk · contribs)
  31. JamesNotin (talk · contribs)
  32. Ppt91 (talk · contribs)
  33. Slacker13 (talk · contribs)

General

[edit]

Infoboxes

[edit]

Requested articles

[edit]

Actors

[edit]

Architects

[edit]
Click on "►" below to display subcategories:
Architects


Illustrators

[edit]
Click on "►" below to display subcategories:
Illustrators

Painters

[edit]
Click on "►" below to display subcategories:
Painters

Photographers

[edit]
Click on "►" below to display subcategories:
Photographers

Sculptors

[edit]
Click on "►" below to display subcategories:
Sculptors

Comics artists

[edit]
Click on "►" below to display subcategories:
Comics artists

Visual arts deletions

[edit]
Visual arts deletion sorting discussions
See also: Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Artists


Visual arts

[edit]

Ashmina Ranjit

[edit]
Ashmina Ranjit (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)

Subject isn’t notable in Nepal. Given sources doesn’t meet criteria. Written as a promotional piece. Article is Full of information unsupported by given sources. Rahmatula786 (talk) 01:25, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article appears to disclose sufficient information to suggest that the subject might be notable. I would tag the article for improvement rather than delete and revisit in the future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashlar (talk • contribs)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge‎ to Darcelle XV Plaza. Liz Read! Talk! 19:48, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fountain to a Rose

[edit]
Fountain to a Rose (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 coverage in RS other than entries on the Portland city website and a local blog. WP:RUNOFTHEMILL PlotinusEnjoyer (talk) 20:04, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Inyo Council for the Arts

[edit]
Inyo Council for the Arts (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, perma-stub without any sources since 2006, since I couldn't find any sources that aren't part of a connected organization themselves, it is likely to remain a perma-stub. ロドリゲス恭子 (talk) 23:02, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Frederic Swigert Jr. Memorial Fountain

[edit]
Charles Frederic Swigert Jr. Memorial Fountain (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 appear in any RS, other than a single entry listing it at the Smithsonian Institute. Should be merged into "Oregon Zoo." PlotinusEnjoyer (talk) 15:10, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arts and Oregon. PlotinusEnjoyer (talk) 15:10, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts, Architecture, and Animal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:16, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to Oregon Zoo as an alternative to deletion. It's only mentioned within the context of the Zoo. It's a really cool sculpture, but I can't find any indication whatsoever that it is notable itself within a fine art or art historical context, aside from being in Smithsonian's database of public sculptures, and a mention in a book authored by his wife about the sculptor's life and work, which is a non-independent source. The current sourcing only mentions the sculpture within the context of the zoo. A WP:BEFORE search finds no significant coverage in independent reliable sources. In addition to the Oregon Zoo target article, some of the content can also be used to improve the Richard Beyer article (the sculptor who made the work.) I am glad the sculpture was restored, and that people and especially children continue to enjoy it. Netherzone (talk) 13:47, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, seems like a reasonable fork if Wikipedia is going to cover the topic at Oregon Zoo, Richard Beyer, Charles F. Swigert, Fountains in Portland, Oregon, and List of public art in Portland, Oregon. In addition to the Smithsonian Institution entry, there are now citations to four Oregonian articles and other official documentation. ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:46, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. It does not pass WP:GNG - there's a passing mention in the local newspaper, a link to a database site, and two primary sources linked to the city. SportingFlyer T·C 22:50, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, the topic is notable enough for a stand-alone page. With wide coverage in the reputable source The Oregonian, the sculpture meets GNG. It may be in the Oregon zoo, but that's just a logical location for the work of art and not a merge magnet. Randy Kryn (talk) 01:44, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    There's not wide coverage, they just appear to be passing mentions, two of the three of which are from the days before and after it opened. SportingFlyer T·C 03:16, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge Generic small fountain/sculpture with minimal coverage insufficient to pass GNG. The Oregon Zoo has a variety of artwork and features that should be covered in the main article; separate pages aren't needed for details like a transcription of the plaque or a 30-year-old condition assessment. The Oregon Zoo's own website doesn't mention it and I can't even find a photo of it on Google or Flickr besides the low-res one on the Smithsonian database, so notability is not at all shown. Artworks aren't notable or need a separate page just because we have other articles about their location, artist, subject (nope, the newly written article is about the subject's father) or thematic topic (none of which are particularly long). Reywas92Talk 15:06, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The Oregonian's detailed descriptor of the statue in their 2 August 1983, issue, seems like a reputable source. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:24, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    A couple sentences is hilariously not detailed...still only one source and not enough to need a separate page for. Reywas92Talk 22:02, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:16, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Visual arts - Proposed deletions

[edit]

Visual arts - Images for Deletion

[edit]

Visual arts - Deletion Review

[edit]

Performing arts

[edit]

Comedians

[edit]
Click on "►" below to display subcategories:
Comedians

Dancers

[edit]
Click on "►" below to display subcategories:
Dancers

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 on "►" below to display subcategories:
Writers

Comics writers

[edit]
Click on "►" below to display subcategories:
Comics writers

Romance authors

[edit]

Lists

[edit]

Poets

[edit]
Click on "►" below to display subcategories:
Poets

Stubs

[edit]

Authors / Writers deletions

[edit]
Authors / Writers deletion sorting discussions


Authors

[edit]

Jens Hoffmann

[edit]
Jens Hoffmann (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 am the subject of this article and am requesting a courtesy deletion. The only notable aspect to my career in terms of wide in-depth press coverage is only one event, and no other coverage reveals substantial public interest in my career - the rest are run of the mill sources or passing mentions. There has been a banner at the top of the page for seven years asking for additional citations for verification, and none have come forward that changed its status. I would ask for the community to delete my page, which I had no hand in creating. JHHM (talk) 00:27, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Charu Chandra Bandyopadhyay

[edit]
Charu Chandra Bandyopadhyay (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)

Insufficient Sources. Rahmatula786 (talk) 05:47, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ansuman Bhagat (Writer)

[edit]
Ansuman Bhagat (Writer) (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)

Repost of material previously salted at Ansuman Bhagat. Was tagged A7 and declined, then draftified and undone so WP:DRAFTOBJECT now applies and we need a AfD. * Pppery * it has begun... 02:34, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jerusalem Demsas

[edit]
Jerusalem Demsas (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 and WP:NAUTHOR. Lacks direct and in-depth coverage in independent secondary sources. Self-auhtored articles are not enough to prove her notability. Gheus (talk) 14:15, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep:
Multiple references show significant, not trivial, coverage in independent secondary sources, discussing her early life (references 1-5), professional career and her views and contributions to the discussion of the housing crisis. An important notability factor (WP:AUTHOR) relies on the following: The person's work (or works) has won significant critical attention. Her book has received has significant critical attention, including book reviews in major sites including Vox and Bloomberg News (ref 9), which stated that Demsas "has distinguished herself within the supply-side camp." References 8 & 9 show she is "known for originating a significant new concept," further enhancing her notability per WP:NAUTHOR. Her work has led to multiple high profile interviews, including on Bloomberg (ref. 9), NPR (ref. 11) and Ezra Klein's NYTimes interview (ref. 12), indicating her work has had significant attention. Included in the article were her opinions on the housing crisis; there is no Wikipedia injunction against discussing a subject's views. There is no Wikipedia injunction against using the subject's self-authored published works in reputable publications to verify the information presented. The references discussed above were used to verify Demsas' views, not to establish notability. And, only 4/18 references even fall within that purview. In brief: "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." (Wikipedia:Notability (people)). The article meets all criteria.
I note that the first reviewer (Ipigott]) did not see a problem with this article, and later removed a tag stating that this article may not achieve notability, claiming that "del tag - no longer applicable." Mwinog2777 (talk) 21:05, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This was because additional pertinent work had been carried out on the article.--Ipigott (talk) 10:47, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ruth Ben-Ghiat

[edit]
Ruth Ben-Ghiat (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 named chair or anything for WP:NPROF. The current "named" position is a temporary visting role not a faculty role as expected for NPROF. None of the sources here are independent, reliable, and providing significant coverage of her. The RS use her opinion on Trump but that does not make her notable. Czarking0 (talk) 15:52, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll also note that the top editor to the page has been blocked for sockpuppeting. User:JmsDoug Czarking0 (talk) 15:58, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Women, and California. Shellwood (talk) 16:27, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, History, Politics, Massachusetts, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:36, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The nomination points out only that she does not meet one very specific WP:PROF criterion, #C5. But notability need not achieved through meeting that criterion when others are available. In this case, she has many published reviews of her books, easily passing both WP:AUTHOR and (because they are in-depth independent reliable sources about her work) WP:GNG. As for "top editor" JmsDoug: that editor's contributions were limited to the infobox and the paragraph about the visiting position at the University of Hawaii. The article creation itself was long ago by someone else. So the suggestion that this is a foundationally tainted article turns out to be, if not disingenous, then at least spectacularly false. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:58, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    This does not only talk about [[WP:NPROF]. I specifically stated why she does not meet WP:GNG. I just reread WP:AUTHOR and I am not seeing how she passes that either. if not disingenous, then at least spectacularly false Dude seriously? I googled for additional sources about her and I do not see any that are sig cov, independent, reliable. Czarking0 (talk) 23:26, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    None so blind as will not see.
    But to lead you more directly to what you have not seen: WP:AUTHOR 4(c) "The person's work (or works) has ... won significant critical attention". WP:GNG: "A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
    The many published reviews constitute both "significant critical attention" and "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". They are indeed about the subject in the sense that they are entirely about the subject's work, the thing she is notable for, just as we would expect significant coverage of an athlete to be about their athletic accomplishments or significant coverage of a musician to be about their musical performances. —David Eppstein (talk) 02:04, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: There are enough reviews about her works that meets NAUTHOR. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 20:07, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - and I'd say a speedy one at that. Several books with multiple reviews in reliable independent sources means that she passes WP:AUTHOR, and her citation record [29] looks strong as well (five papers with over a hundred citations, the top one with over 800 citations and an h-index of 21), almost certainly meeting WP:PROF#1. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 23:17, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok this one probably changes my mind. Czarking0 (talk) 23:26, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WP:AUTHOR, WP:PROF, WP:HEY, and WP:BEFORE. I deprodded the proposed nomination, because doing so would have been controversial at a time when we don't need any more, and because of clear notability. She is well-known as The expert on Fascism in the United States today: a simple Google search will reveal that. She earned tenure as a full professor at one of the world's top universities, New York University, where it's very difficult to get tenure. David Eppstein has patiently added evidence of author notability to the article. When nominating a scholar, you need also to look at Google Scholar. Bearian (talk) 09:03, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The subject seems to be publicly notable enough, based on a basic Google search and independent news coverage like this. Doctorstrange617 (talk) 17:44, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per NAUTHOR. Thanks for adding the references to reviews, David Eppstein. Innisfree987 (talk) 00:32, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Article only canvasses her early life and education. While her bio doesn't disclose notability, her publications might. Suggest note on talk page and tag(s) to allow the article to be revised with an aim to discussing her career and the impact of her work. ash (talk) 07:08, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Having spoken with experts in Authoritarianism, I would like to add (BLP violation removed) CounterDolus (talk) 16:11, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Almost forgot... (BLP violation removed) CounterDolus (talk) 16:30, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to Wikipedia @CounterDolus! I'm sure that the points you make will be welcome in the article if they are backed up by reliable, independent, published sources. I wouldn't say that they constitute grounds for deletion though. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 16:59, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please note also CounterDolus that Wikipedia policy on WP:Biographies of living people apply to talk pages as well as entries. These claims require reliable sources or should be removed. Innisfree987 (talk) 23:39, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That should be easy enough to provide.
Thank you. CounterDolus (talk) 02:00, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Since you still haven’t done so, I have removed the unsourced claims. You may add any back that you can provide a reliable source for. Innisfree987 (talk) 18:16, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jessica Sarah Flaum

[edit]
Jessica Sarah Flaum (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 has sources but not a single one treats the subject other than passing mentions of her as a member of a cast. A further search reveals only primary sources and a raft of social media entries. Fails both points of WP:NACTOR. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:26, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Fails both points of WP:NACTOR." according to the nominator? What points? How does she fail them if her roles are significant and the productions, notable? -Mushy Yank. 15:44, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ullekh NP

[edit]
Ullekh NP (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 evidence of WP:SUSTAINED notability. Amigao (talk) 16:02, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

William Green (writer)

[edit]
William Green (writer) (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 can't see that any of the citations serve to establish notability TheLongTone (talk) 14:04, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TheLongTone - thank you for your long work on Wikipedia. I did not receive any sort of compensation for this article, but I probably should have disclosed that the subject was known to me as a friend-of-a-friend sort of thing. I thought based on the coverage in mainstream US media (Washington Post, Business Insider, Bank Rate) that the subject met notability requirements, and tried to write the article as well sourced and neutral as I could. I'll accept the decision of this page. 37and7 (talk) 14:45, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Gervais (psychologist)

[edit]
Michael Gervais (psychologist) (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)

Previously deleted and salted: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Gervais * Pppery * it has begun... 00:38, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Farouk Yousif

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Farouk Yousif (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 is only one secondary source on the subject which is below the minimum set in the notability guidelines for people set out in WP:BIO. Abolishedtemple (talk) 18:37, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Christine Horner

[edit]
Christine Horner (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 found this page via the Fringe Theory Noticeboard. The issue there was that she promotes alternative methods for cancer prevention and treatment, and the article came across as if this is not a controversial thing to do. ie it's promo/fringe.

While looking for critical coverage of her, it became apparent to me that there actually isn't any, and that it's not actually clear why she should have a page. Her media appearances are fleeting and mostly decidedly local. Her one apparent claim to fame is that in the 1990s, she was part of a successful campaign for reconstructive breast surgery for breast cancer patients to be covered by insurance. The problem is, all the evidence for her having a prominent role comes back to her claims about herself in media, or a very short article she herself wrote in the American Journal of Surgery: Horner-Taylor, Christine (1998). "The breast reconstruction advocacy project: One woman can make a difference". The American Journal of Surgery. 175 (2): 85–86. doi:10.1016/S0002-9610(97)00271-7. ISSN 0002-9610. PMID 9515520.. When I looked for contemporaneous media coverage of the bill that got the surgery covered, it's (a) sparse, and (b) doesn't mention her. As far as I can see, she didn't win any prizes or awards for it, and her own article is unclear how big a role she played in the campaign. In short, I don't think she passes WP:ANYBIO. OsFish (talk) 04:28, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Richard Keatinge (talk) 14:16, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I took out one reference that was a dead link. Most of the rest of the references are by her, not about her. On a different note, many physicians and researchers have made the sugar/cancer correlation; I learned about it as an undergraduate in 1986, so her article about it was not in any way groundbreaking. Bearian (talk) 13:59, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Assuming Christine Horner is the same as Christine Horner-Taylor, there is coverage of her 1990s breast-reconstruction activism, which included president Bill Clinton, in Ohio Medicine: Journal of the Ohio State Medical Association for June 1996. A deep dive into newspaper coverage may yield additional coverage. And note that the mere fact a subject promotes or discusses "fringe" subjects is not a de facto reason for deletion. --Animalparty! (talk) 22:40, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I didn’t give it as a reason for deletion. I explained that her notability doesn’t appear to rest in any of her current activism, although the page presents her as a notable figure in these issues. Thus we need to look at her role in the 1990s campaign. Thanks for the link - is there an efficient way to search these sources? Straightforward google missed this one for me.OsFish (talk) 01:11, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Google misses a lot of information (see deep web): tons of newspaper databases are not indexed. NewsBank, NewspaperArchive or similar databases can be queried with a subscription, or a library card. --Animalparty! (talk) 05:22, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The deep web has nothing to do with this. And if you have access to newspaper articles, feel free to cite them. So far, no one has produced anything independent of Horner herself. — The Hand That Feeds You:Bite 13:56, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mal Fletcher

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Mal Fletcher (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 independent sources. Most of the sources are organizations the article subject founded or worked on, such as Next Wave, 2020 plus, Edges tv, Youth Alive, their youtube channel. Two sources are interviews with the article subject. Two sources link to error pages, such as one titled "Oops". Truthnope (talk) 21:47, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jean Boudriot

[edit]
Jean Boudriot (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)

Lacking in real sources for WP:BIO, and no reviews that I can find for his book, Le vaisseau de 74 canons, for WP:AUTHOR. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:40, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:20, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete : The Fr Wiki article is only a list of national catalogue listings used a sourcing and a list of books. The sourcing is even worse than what's here... I can only find this review of one of his books [33]. I don't see enough sourcing to keep the article. Oaktree b (talk) 13:51, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep This review in the Naval War College journal (?, I'm not sure if it's a magazine or a formal academic jouranl) seems to help this person pass AUTHOR [34]. Oaktree b (talk) 13:55, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Umm Aktham

[edit]
Umm Aktham (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 don't think this person is notable enough. I couldn't find enough reliable sources to prove its notability. فيصل (talk) 01:12, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Qatar. فيصل (talk) 01:12, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Women. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:20, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Of all nation-states, Qatar has the lowest proportion of women biographies: under 8%, according to humaniki. It feels like there's some WP:Systemic bias here, which was why I created the page. Dsp13 (talk) 11:42, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I have found and added several sources, which are overviews of Arab women writers and literature, tertiary sources rather than secondary. The content within them about this writer is short, but the fact that they include her, and the way they write about her writing, leads me to think that secondary sources exist. The last source currently in the article, at magazine.jouhina.com, is unfortunately a deadlink and not archived (as far as I have been able to find). From what I can see on the Wayback Machine of other articles in that magazine, it would have included critique of her writing, by the author of the article and others, and biographical detail, and would certainly count as SIGCOV. Perhaps a WP editor will have access to it offline. I have tried googling her Arabic name (I do not read or speak Arabic!), and there is one source the title of which translates as Writers from the Arabian Gulf, with the content described as "Arab authors; women Arab authors; Persian Gulf countries; biography." Even if I could read Arabic, only a snippet view is available on Google Books, but if anyone has access to أدباء وأديبات من الخليج العربي offline, it may also be useful. RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:09, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:48, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jeffrey Gitomer

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Jeffrey Gitomer (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 am not sure if he is notable. Most of sources seem to be either primary or only tangentially related to him. I am unsure whether he meets WP:CREATIVE; points 3 and 4 are relevant. I am not sure if the attention he got was critical and whether his work has been covered in enough periodical articles. (I see [35], but not much more.) Even if The Little Red Book of Selling had made him notable, he would seem to be a bit too BLP1E-ish, as the rest of the coverage is more-or-less trivial or primary. Janhrach (talk) 15:15, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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 23:45, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - I see plenty of good sources. I remember the incident that lead to his being banned from the airline, so BLP1E doesn't apply. There are issues with the article, but they can be resolved through ordinary editing. Bearian (talk) 13:51, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Bearian: Do you think he meets points 3 or 4 of WP:CREATIVE? I did not express that well, but WP:CREATIVE was intended to be the main point of my nom. I am willing to withdraw this nom if there is a convincing argument that he does. Janhrach (talk) 11:16, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I think that he meets factor #3 as having written several related books. Bearian (talk) 11:55, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, but it also says that:

In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews, or of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series);

I don't see multiple independent periodical articles or reviews, but I haven't really done a thorough search. Like I have written, I have found [36], but the other articles I have found were blogs (or similar), not articles from periodicals. Janhrach (talk) 12:36, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment (may return with !vote) This is a typical promotional article for someone whose main skill is promoting. He writes those books a friend of mine calls "business porn": which promise great wealth not unlike that of megachurch leaders. I removed some irrelevant promotional statements, but there are undoubtedly more. I am not sure that the speaking awards (e.g. "Certified Speaking Professional (CSP) Award") are of value because the organization appears to be a speakers' bureau. Two of the book awards (IPPY) are indeed awards but he is among other winners, in one case one of 66. A fairly snide article in Time magazine was used for one "cute" quote but ignored 4 paragraphs of negative review of his work. (I fixed some of that.) The reviews by Jack Covert seem to be in a personal blog, albeit a pretty ambitious one. His books have sold many copies, and I can see some presence in library collections. I confess that I have little regard for this category of output, along with all of the self-help books. I just thought I should be honest about my prejudice. Lamona (talk) 00:31, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Don Libes

[edit]
Don Libes (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 does not meet Wikipedia’s notability guidelines, because there is no significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. Most references are primary or technical sources rather than in-depth third-party discussions of Don Libes himself. The article reads more like a CV than an appropriate Wiki biography Neurorocker (talk) 02:31, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:30, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Their Google Scholar page seems to sufficiently demonstrate their notability as an academic. Madeleine (talk) 03:03, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: for policy based input please. A Google Scholar page cannot be used to prove or disprove notability.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 15:21, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rajlukshmee Debee Bhattacharya

[edit]
Rajlukshmee Debee Bhattacharya (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)

Apart from the cited links, I couldn't find much info on the web supporting notability. Soumyapatra13 (talk) 12:01, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Garuda Talk! 13:37, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Fails WP:CREATIVE and WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 22:16, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I have added some info and a reference, and will continue looking for more. Like Eddie891, I think having an obit in Indian Literature and being described as "a major voice in Indian poetry and women's writing" in My Birth Was Not In Vain: Selected Poems by Seven Bengali Women are good indications that she is notable and that there is more coverage. She published many poems in Bengali, and there is likely to be coverage in Bengali language sources (not Bengali Wikipedia), and other languages of the subcontinent. Frustratingly, many of the English language sources which come up in a Google Books source are snippet view only. I hope someone with access to relevant hardcopy sources will add more. RebeccaGreen (talk) 15:42, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 14:55, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Authors proposed deletions

[edit]

Tools

[edit]
Main tool page: toolserver.org
Article alerts are available, updated by AAlertBot. More information...
  • Reflinks - Edits bare references - adds title/dates etc. to bare references
  • Checklinks - Edit and repair external links
  • Dab solver - Quickly resolve ambiguous links.
  • Peer reviewer - Provides hints and suggestion to improving articles.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Biography/Arts_and_entertainment&oldid=1264837709#Writers_and_critics"