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
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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
Fails WP:NBIO and WP:V. I've removed most of the promo but what remains is riddled with citations that don't support the statement that they are meant to, or dead links. It was declined three times at AfC but moved to mainspace by author. The subject of the article is keen on self-promotion (see the "Roberts Honored with Pollie and 40 Under 40 Nominations" citation for a lovely bit of them citing themselves praising themselves) Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 09:40, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The only credible source is an interview, which is not an independent source. References to significant coverage in several reliable sources completely independent of Professor Dave are required. Cullen328 (talk) 05:40, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Most of the sources are to faculty pages and other profiles. The source from The New York Times is a wedding announcement and the bulk of the text of the article is about her parents and grandparents. A Google search for material about her turned up little to support a claim of notability, other than items like this one that are not the in-depth coverage required to meet the standard. Alansohn (talk) 18:55, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He is a professor not a dean or vice chancellor at any University or hasn’t received any national or international prestigious award. fails,WP:NPROF. Mainly reference used are of university self or publication sites, lack of independent reliable sources to establish notability, fails WP:GNG. TheSlumPanda (talk) 16:36, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In case of becoming an interim dean i think that it doesn’t give directly notability because it will be only a temporary post for short period of time till the election of new permanent dean. Secondly interviews as generally considered non reliable because everything the interviewee says is primary and non independent per, wikipedia:Interviews #Notability . But yes he has some books which are reviewed by Some Independent and Reliable Sites i.e, NYC, Washington dc. Which is a good measure for his notability. TheSlumPanda (talk) 21:50, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article as provided demonstrates significant developments in Blake Alma's notability since the 2018 deletion. The sources cited, particularly WCPO (a major Cincinnati ABC affiliate), K-Love (a nationally syndicated radio network), and multiple Cincinnati Enquirer archive pieces, offer substantial, independent coverage that extends well beyond passing mentions or quotes.
These are not unreliable sources or self-promotion; they are established, reputable media outlets providing significant coverage of Alma's work and impact. The WCPO and Cincinnati Enquirer pieces offer in-depth reporting on Alma's activities and influence in the outdoor and conservation spheres.
This is not a case of WP:REFBOMBING. Each source included provides meaningful, substantial coverage. A thorough review of these sources, paying close attention to the depth of coverage and the independence of the reporting, is warranted.
The current body of coverage, coming from established and independent media outlets, meets Wikipedia's notability criteria. The subject has clearly gained significant attention since the previous AfD, justifying a reevaluation of his notability status. If there are specific concerns about any of the sources or their content, they should be addressed individually rather than dismissing the article outright. Delawaretallman (talk) 17:56, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the detailed breakdown...I totally agree! I put a lot of effort into this article and it's great to see someone else recognizing how Alma's profile has grown since the other deletion which I wasn't aware of until a live admin told me. Those sources really do show he's become noteworthy for this page. Thanks @DelawaretallmanCoincollector4500 (talk) 18:06, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You're most welcome. Upon further review, some of the data in media coverage seems slightly like a form WP:REFBOMBING however, if cleaned up you should be just fine. Just use the secondary and primary sources that are in-depth. @Coincollector4500 Good luck! Delawaretallman (talk) 18:11, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lastly, you quoted him on a religious statement from seemingly a personal social media account as the last source. I'd suggest you'd find that on a public account or another source. Looks like the K-Love article also quoted from that video so I suggest using that as the source. Delawaretallman (talk) 18:15, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'd like to point out that Mick Armstrong was mentioned in the target when the redirect was created. He was only removed from that article a minute before the redirect was listed for discussion, for not being mentioned in the target... The removal (and deletion) may turn out to be perfectly justified (I have no insight into and no opinion about this matter), but I find the reason "not mentioned in target" strange when the reason for this is that the user has removed it themselves moments earlier, and then doesn't disclose that they did this. Renerpho (talk) 05:35, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
With the original state of the Socialist Alternative (Australia) article (before the removal of that paragraph, and more so when the redirect was created in 2020), that redirect looks sensible to me. The relevant paragraph was tagged as needing citations since June 2024; and as I said, removing it may be the right choice. But it wasn't an unreasonable target for the redirect based on what it looked like at the time. Renerpho (talk) 06:06, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TarnishedPath: Yes, and maybe others will be more lenient. WP:CHALLENGE is clear that you had every right to remove it. That doesn't mean that the timing wasn't unfortunate, and that this wasn't important. I would have preferred either an upfront mention that you removed it ("I have just removed this as failing WP:V, and believe the redirect should be deleted because it's no longer mentioned in the target"), or to leave it and include it in the discussion ("I plan to remove this unsourced information from the target, at which point the subject will no longer be mentioned in the target"). This gives users the opportunity to form an opinion if sources exist (the talk page exists if there's more to know). It's a matter of transparency: When I see an argument like "not mentioned in the target", my impression is that this is because the two are unrelated, and the redirect was unreasonable. I feel misled when important background about the article's history is hidden from me. Renerpho (talk) 07:36, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: All the references in the article (that aren't broken) only mention him in passing besides this which is a review of one of Armstrong's books. Performing a search I found a bunch of articles written by him at redflag.org.au (One of Socialist Alternative's newspapers which Armstrong seems to be a member of) and other articles from the same site that discuss him. Redflag is obviously not independent and can't be used to establish notability. Nothing I've found would satisfy WP:AUTHOR and I don't think there's enough for WP:BASIC. Ping me if good sources are found. TarnishedPathtalk04:28, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. All sources on the page are unreliable, dead domains, page not found and non-secondary independent. Fails WP:GNG, WP:NAUTHOR and WP:NBIO. The degree of significance of the subject and of role as writer is not enough to warrant a page on the subject. RangersRus (talk) 16:56, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ratekreel, When you nominated the article, at that time only two references were there in the article. Now number of references are 10+. All references are from national newspapers or books or authenticated government websites. Author have written many books, all can not be listed in the article. Two stories are base for two different bollywood films. Some work by the author is translated in multiple languages by well known authors and translators. Looking at these things, article should not be deleted. There are some research articles which are clearly comparing author's work with Premchand, which is also like an award for Hindi writers. ☆★Sanjeev Kumar (talk) 09:04, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article is sourced to blogs and the UN's website. As far as I'm aware working for the UN does not form part of any alternative notability criteria and the primary sources cited here don't cover this subject in any significant depth and don't support WP:ANYBIO𝔓420°𝔓Holla10:15, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural keep. Nominator was blocked as a sock, and no valid rationale for deletion was presented (since the article appears to be decently sourced). CycloneYoristalk!21:13, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. No good reason for deletion was given, Bilgrami has authored at least one notable work, and I don't see anything wrong with the sources. Badbluebus (talk) 23:49, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The sources cited in the article do not meet WP:SIGCOV. They include blogs, Medium posts, interviews, and primarily passing mentions. The article from The Caspian Post appears promotional or sponsored to me, and we also lack consensus on its reliability. Even if we ignore that, a single article cannot establish notability for the subject. I searched for more reliable sources with significant coverage but was unable to find any, only passing mentions similar to what is already in the article. The subject also fails to meet WP:AUTHOR, as their books have not been reviewed by multiple reliable sources. GrabUp - Talk09:12, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I’m an author of this article. I’m willing to respond to every argument.
Before publishing the article, I have read WP:AUTHOR (Wikipedia’s Notability Guideline, section "Creative professionals"). According to this section, a person is notable if "regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors". My article meets this criterion, because of following reasons: (1) First of all, Musayeva is interviewed and/or cited as an expert by the mainstream media mentioned in the article (Bussiness Insider, Newsweek, Fox News and others). This means that these big media companies recognize her position as an authority on the subject. (2) Secondly, she is a YouTuber with over million of subscribers and over 40 million views of her videos, which are big numbers, especially given the fact that etiquette is not a common interest. This establishes her as one of the most popular/successful etiquette experts in the world. Isn’t that enough to claim she is notable?
(3) Moreover, the article is about her, not about her books.
I have used multiple secondary and independent sources, mostly interviews with her (which is understandable, because the interviews with a creative person are often the most fruitful source about their lives and achievements). Half of the sources are mainstream media outlets such as Fox News, Daily Mail and WFLA-TV.
I didn’t include any self-published source.
I have used two sources published by the subject of the article, which is permitted. There is no doubt to the authenticy of these sources, as they were published on the official page of the subject of the article. Moreover, the article is not based primarily on such sources (there are only two).
I tried my best to meet the Wikipedia's Guidelines.
I will be taking care of the article. She is getting more and more recognition from the media every year. There will be more sources coming in the near future. I will be updating the article and bettering it. But please don't delete my work. Mlody1312 (talk) 09:43, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mlody1312: If you want to work on this article, draftification can be done. However, interviews, sources claiming the subject as an expert, and view numbers alone do not make the subject notable. What’s your opinion on draftification? Please let me know. GrabUp - Talk09:53, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have worked on this article for almost two weeks in my draftspace and for now there is no more information that can be added to the article. I tried my best to make the article as informative as it was possible, in order to give the readers a full understanding of who the described person is.
According to the Wikipedia's Notability (People) Guideline, Jamila falls into the section/category of "Creative professionals". This particular section "applies to authors, editors, journalists, filmmakers, photographers, artists, architects, and other creative professionals" (exact quote).
She belongs to this category, because she is not only an author of books, but also a videoblogger/a YouTuber.
In the next passage the criteria of notability are listed, and it says that the person is notable when "regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors" (exact quote).
The subject of the article meets this criteria. She is regarded as an important figure, i.e. an authority on etiquette. She is cited by multiple media outlets and invited to television. She gets media coverage for what she does professionally.
Moving on to the next point, of course view numbers on YouTube is not the only thing contributing to her notability, but is definitely an important one. There is a whole category in Wikipedia dedicated to YouTubers. I think having over 1 million subscribers and over 40 million views is big enough to be included into "YouTubers" category. There are subjects that have smaller numbers and still are included. Examples are: James Frederick, Matt Baume or RinRin Doll.
I feel like my article is criticised quite harshly, especially in comparison to other articles from similar categories. For example:
• Thomas_Farley (manners expert) (almost no linking to sources)
• Mary Killen (small number of sources)
• John Morgan (etiquette expert) (small number of sources)
• Judith Martin (here we have some interviews with the subject used as sources as well, and it seems like it doesn’t bother anyone; interviews with the subjects are really fruitful sources of information about such individuals)
Your statement about "primarily passing mentions" is not wholly fair, it diminishes her media presence to some extent. In the sources I gave she is asked for her opinions and suggestions as an expert and is cited as such. Most of these sources are full-talk interviews, and in others, her answers take up much of the space.
As she is getting more media recognition every month, more media coverage is coming in anytime soon. I will be happy to expand and improve this article. Please don’t delete my work. Mlody1312 (talk) 14:41, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As you said, ‘As she is getting more media recognition every month, more media coverage is likely to come soon. I will be happy to expand and improve this article. Please don’t delete my work.’ That’s why I proposed draftification. If significant coverage comes in the future, then it can be submitted for AfC review. Currently, I don’t believe the article meets notability. The additional criteria you’re quoting do not inherently make a subject notable, as it says: ‘People are likely to be notable if they meet any of the following standards. Failure to meet these criteria is not conclusive proof that a subject should not be included; conversely, meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included.’ GrabUp - Talk15:29, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize for using WP:WHATABOUT arguments. I stand my ground when it comes to other arguments, included those on notability. I already gave my reasons and arguments for keeping this article, and I guess that’s all I could do. Maybe let’s wait for other users to join the discussion. Mlody1312 (talk) 15:59, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I don't find any book reviews, so likely doesn't pass AUTHOR. The sources used are either red as non-RS or orange (iffy) per Source Highlighter. My search only brings up where to buy the book and primary sources. I don't see anything we can use to prove notability. Oaktree b (talk) 20:41, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are reader reviews on goodreads and amazon. But anyway, this article is not about her books. The books are just one of many elements that make up the whole article. If I were going to write an article about any of her books, then requiring more reviews would be justified. Mlody1312 (talk) 07:11, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
User ratings mean nothing to us. If you can find two or more critical reviews of any of her books from reliable secondary sources, she will meet the criteria for WP:AUTHOR. GrabUp - Talk07:31, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The sources used are not the best, especially LinkedIn. If a profile was done that wasn't just the interview, it could meet notability, but I don't think it meets it in the current state. As the author of this page has said, she is getting more media attention as the months pass, so at some point, she will have a New Yorker or some other news/magazine profile done. When that happens, the page could come back up (with the removal of not great sources and an overall better flow). Bpuddin (talk) 07:20, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In accordance with this section of the guideline, using LinkedIn is permitted "as self-published, primary sources, but only if they can be authenticated as belonging to the subject", which they are in case of my article. Mlody1312 (talk) 07:23, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Notability, in this case, is established by the fact that mainstream media outlets recognize her position as an authority on the topic of etiquette; she is interviewed and cited as an expert; she gets media coverage for what she does professionally.
LinkedIn can be used "As a reliable source sometimes. LinkedIn pages may be used as self-published, primary sources, but only if they can be authenticated as belonging to the subject." (exact quote)
The Perennial website page also states for LinkedIn, "Common Issues - Wikipedia is not a directory of any subject's complete web presence, and links to social networking sites (other than official links) are discouraged...As a reliable source, LinkedIn is problematic in the same ways as MySpace, Facebook, etc. as self-published and unverifiable, unreliable content."
The overall problem I find with the page is the use of not reliable sources that are just conversations with Ms. Musayeva or are her own websites. Like LinkendIn, the Authority Magazine interview, the Wonder Woman Mag interview, Melissa Ambrosini interview, The British Protocol Academy source, Unconventional Life - Podcast, the Caspian Post article, the MITH Q&A, I AM CEO Podcast, Mail Online, and jamilamusayeva.com are all not fact checked or sourced articles, which is the overwhelming majority of this page.
I still believe the page should be deleted and can be republished if there are better sourced news articles/profiles done.
Delete. The creator has canvassed 15 editors asking for help. Their message to me, at least, was neutral and transparent and I don't think they could have assumed that I would !vote keep, so I haven't recused myself. My gut feel is that the subject of the article is determined to raise their profile, hence appearing as a guest on several podcasts cited in the article. Given this new editor is an WP:SPA I am going to assume that this is an undeclared paid piece. I have expanded about half of the references in the article to tag which ones are interviews as part of my review of their content. I have not come across any content in those references that indicates notability. Everything I've read or heard are interviews, or her expressing her opinions, rather than WP:INDEPTH, WP:INDEPENDENT, WP:SECONDARY coverage by WP:RELIABLE sources about her. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 08:35, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but these accusations are ridiculous. I have a Wikipedia account since 2019. I never created any article before because I had no need to. I'm just an appreciator of Ms. Musayeva's work, one of her viewers, and that's why I wanted to create an article about her. Mlody1312 (talk) 09:04, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mlody1312 I'm, puzzled: what led you to create an account on 24 November 2019 (as I see you did) but then not to make any edits at all until this month? PamD12:11, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I just don't understand why anyone would trouble to create an account unless they intended to start editing there and then: you "had no need" to create the account. PamD16:22, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
She has made posts related to her birthday on Instagram.
Not every biographical article has a reference to a birth date, even though the birth date is known. And since it is known, I don't see why not to add this information. Mlody1312 (talk) 15:56, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. I've removed the birth date but replaced it with an approximate one from the statement that she was 31 in the Mekhdi ref. "It is known" is not an adequate source. PamD16:20, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations, you have changed the correct information to the incorrect one. I've told you my source, it's her Instagram. Literally 10 seconds of searching in Google:
I reverted it, because claiming that instagram isn't valid in this case is ridiculous, it's like claiming that she herself doesn't know when was she born. Mlody1312 (talk) 19:48, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll delete age data then. And when it comes to the clarification of certification, it is literally clarified in the article, in the "early life" section. Your addition is unjustified. Mlody1312 (talk) 20:10, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Poor to unreliable to self published sources and blogs mostly with some deadlinks. Fails WP:NAUTHOR and WP:PROF. Subject authored two books and neither are notable. I cannot find subject's work that has made any significant impact and achievement to be worthy of notice and noteworthy. Fails WP:NBIO. RangersRus (talk) 14:13, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Subject has received moderate attention after their passing (and prior). She headlined multiple secondary reliable publications. A simple Google search is enough. dxneo (talk) 02:20, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Sources in the article are either eulogizing her or gossiping about her personal life, and a BEFORE Google search turned up similar results with DJ Fresh dominating most of the headlines. There's no significant independent coverage of Sikwane's actual career. This is reflected in the article having been created nearly two months ago after her death (which alone does not automatically establish notability) but currently still a stub with next to no content. Is she known more for her media work, or her relationship with DJ Fresh? 💥Casualty• Hop along. •03:13, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your feedback regarding the article. While I understand your concern about notability, I believe this page has enough reliable coverage to merit its existence on Wikipedia. The Business Insider profile provides insight into Everspark, and while it may have some promotional aspects, it serves as a starting point for understanding the company’s significance.
To strengthen the article further, I will look for additional independent sources to enhance its credibility and improve the overall tone. Your input is valuable, and I'm committed to making this page meet Wikipedia's standards. Aliumair435 (talk) 17:07, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The Business Insider piece does not even mention Jason Hennessey, and it literally says We have been featured in various news pieces, primarily providing insight into new developments in the search engine optimization and marketing spaces (like about Google Places or the mobile wallet phenomenon, proving that source not independent abd is of zero value for establishing notability. No evidence of notability. Cullen328 (talk) 05:32, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
An article about a "family life and relationship coach, TV personality, and author" sourced entirely to shady pieces. While most of the publications are reliable on their own, the pieces sourced to are either unreliable, of the subject's opinion, run of the mill coverages or vanispamcruft. It's either the subject is publishing their opinion or it's an unreliable "things you need to know about X" piece. Nothing to confer inherent notability here either. Fails WP:GNG over all. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 23:03, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The BLP was created in the main namespace and later draftified by Maliner. The creator then submitted it for review, but later unilaterally moved the BLP back to the main namespace, to avoid AFC review process. So I feel compelled to take this to AFD so the community can decide whether it should remain or be deleted. IMO, it fails both GNG and NAUTHOR, as none of the works are notable enough. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 08:03, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Likely to be contested, so let's get a more firm outcome. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit12:26, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Although I couldn't find sources providing significant coverage as per WP:SIGCOV, I did come across some sources that support the subject's notability, though not conclusively. These include 1, 2, 3, 4, and mentioned featured in BCC Urdu's poetic collection here. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 05:13, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mr.Tsuda is a prominent figure in Japan's internet scene, with over 20 years of experience. From the early days of Twitter Japan's service, he has engaged in various activities as a "media activist(a term he coined)", creating the buzzword "tsuda-ru". He served as a forum committee member for Asahi Shimbun, one of Japan's leading quality media outlets, from 2015 to 2019, and in 2019, he was the artistic director for the Aichi Triennale, an arts festival organized by Aichi Prefecture, establishing himself as a significant presence in the public discourse. His activities have been recognized by public institutions, having been appointed as a member of various government councils and positions in the aforementioned Aichi Prefecture events. Since 2020, he has shifted his focus to his self-established YouTube channel, "POLITAS TV", where he operates as a political opinion YouTuber, engaging in a range of discourse activities. Therefore, he should not be deleted. MihariHarukaze (talk) 10:11, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Follower Count on X (formerly Twitter): As of October 9, 2024, Tsuda's X account has 1.466 million followers, ranking among the top influencers in Japan. For comparison, the Prime Minister of Japan, Shigeru Ishiba, has 418,000 followers (Shigeru Ishiba X account), and the left-wing journalist Isoko Mochizuki, known as the model for the Netflix global series "The Journalist", has 319,000 followers (Isoko Mochizuki X account). This shows that Tsuda is one of Japan’s leading left-wing influencers (Daisuke Tsuda X account).
Official Profile: According to a 2017 profile published by the public relations department of Aichi Prefecture, Tsuda has been active as an internet expert since the 2000s and has appeared in various mass media outlets. He has authored several books on the internet and has held positions as a professor at higher education institutions and as a member of various government committees (Aichi Prefecture PR Document).
Asahi Shimbun Opinion Committee Member: Tsuda served as a member of the opinion committee for Asahi Shimbun, one of Japan's leading quality media outlets, highlighting his recognition in the world of public discourse (Asahi Shimbun Daisuke Tsuda Opinion).
Mention in Ryukyu Shimpo: In 2018, Tsuda was listed as one of the "famous people (著名人)" in an article by Ryukyu Shimpo, Okinawa’s leading regional newspaper, indicating his influence is acknowledged even in regional media (Ryukyu Shimpo).
Artistic Director of Aichi Triennale: In 2019, Tsuda served as the artistic director of the Aichi Triennale, an arts festival hosted by Aichi Prefecture. This event was sponsored by global corporations headquartered in Aichi Prefecture, such as Toyota Motor Corporation, further demonstrating Tsuda's public activities and societal recognition. (Aichi Prefecture Document, Triennale Report)
BTW, that "Official Profile" you mentioned? That's a one-page chronological list of Tsuda's contributions, basically what you'd find as part of a CV. That's not significant coverage in accord with NPEOPLE. Paradoctor (talk) 14:32, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Appeared in FOX News (2010): In June 2010, Tsuda appeared as an expert in an Associated Press's article titled "Twitter a hit in Japan as 'mumbling' tweeters give micro-blogging a distinctly Japanese flavor", which was featured on FOX News. (The FOX News article is available here)
Controversy at Aichi Triennale 2019: In 2019, Tsuda served as the artistic director of Aichi Triennale 2019, which featured works such as a piece that involved burning an image of Emperor Hirohito and a statue symbolizing "comfort women". This exhibition sparked nationwide protests, with critics labeling it "disrespectful" toward the Emperor. The controversy received extensive media coverage, and Takashi Kawamura, the Mayor of Nagoya, staged a sit-in protest in opposition to the exhibition's content. The matter was also discussed in the Japanese parliament, leading to a prolonged national debate. Tsuda faced widespread criticism from various sectors. (NHK article, Mainichi article)
Keynote Speech at "Critics in Residence @KYOTO EXPERIMENT 2024": On October 8, 2024, Tsuda delivered the keynote speech at the "Critics in Residence @KYOTO EXPERIMENT 2024”, hosted by the Delegation of the European Union to Japan. The event's introduction describes him as "widely known for his critical writing about recent shifts in the Japanese and international media environment as well as for establishing his own platforms for independent journalism".
Cited in Google Scholar: A search for "Daisuke Tsuda Media Journalism" on Google Scholar reveals numerous academic papers citing Tsuda, showcasing his influence in the field of media and journalism. (Google Scholar search results)
Appearances on NHK Programs: A search for "津田大介" of NHK’s program database reveals that Tsuda has frequently appeared as an expert on various programs. (NHK Archives search results)
Delete: I tired a .jp website search, nothing comes up. This in a Korean paper [21] briefly mentions this person. Likely more in Japanese sources? I don't know. Oaktree b (talk) 12:05, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Reading the Wind) "If You Want to Exhibit the Comfort Woman Statue" - Editor-in-Chief Masato Inui(Source: Sankei Shimbun, August 6, 2019)Link to article
Event Exhibiting Comfort Woman Statue in Aichi: Chief Cabinet Secretary Suga States "We Will Carefully Examine the Facts and Respond Appropriately"(Source: Sankei Shimbun, August 2, 2019)Link to article
Daisuke Tsuda Apologizes: "The Situation Exceeded Our Expectations. I Take Full Responsibility."(Source: Asahi Shimbun, August 3, 2019)Link to article
The Year of Survival for News Apps: What Will Determine the Winners and Losers(Source: The Nikkei, January 9, 2015)Link to article
"No System in Place to Prevent the Director’s Judgment Errors" – Final Report on the Aichi Triennale(Source: The Nikkei, December 18, 2019)Link to article
All of these articles with the exception of the short third one only features the name ("津田大介") a single time. E.g. the last article is about the "After Freedom of Expression?" exhibition and mentions the guy once as a director. It does not provide in-depth coverage of him. Cortador (talk) 08:17, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Can we get a review of the sources brought to this discussion. It would have been helpful if there had been a more comprehensive deletion nomination statement that demonstrated a BEFORE had been done instead of just a policy acronym which doesn't explain much at all. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk!05:06, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't check all the sources, and won't be able to do so because I can't read Japanese. However, I bunch of the sources are Twitter links, some are YouTube links, a few don't feature the name of the subject or only feature it once. Some are even other Wikipedia articles, which suggests the sourcing situation isn't exactly stellar. Cortador (talk) 15:31, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Twitter posts aren't helpful for notability purposes. The rest aren't even hotlinked, so I don't know what you want us to do with them. We don't speak the language. This is a wall of text that really does nothing for this discussion. Oaktree b (talk) 20:47, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I second that. It should be put in a collapsed template. This discussion was already bloated enough, by replies from Mihari Harukaze who unfortunately can't distinguish between a source about the subject, a source mentioning the subject and a source from the subject. Geschichte (talk) 07:44, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Draft maybe? This [22] is a video, but in a RS. Suggests notability, but the sourcing is just copy-paste from the Japanese wiki, with no attention given to translations. Needs to be reworked. Oaktree b (talk) 20:51, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd support a draft. While the sourcing of the Japanese article isn't great at surface level, we really only need a handful sources with good coverage. Hopefully someone who can read Japanese and/or knows Japanese sources better can chime in. Cortador (talk) 15:33, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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
A book and a PhD thesis from the scholar Elizabeth Rodwell:
The book notes on pages 12: "In parallel, it was of great interest to self-proclaimed “media activist” Tsuda Daisuke that while an estimated one-third to one-half of Japanese computer users engaged with any form of social media, Twitter use had expanded dramatically between 2010 and 2012 as individuals sought alternative means by which to exchange written and visual information."
The book notes on pages 52–53: "As prominent (self-described) “media activist” Tsuda Daisuke writes about nn, its strength lies in its capacity to allow viewers to interact with presenters, and with one another, simultaneously. Always seated behind his laptop during broadcasts, Tsuda, who appears regularly on both television and radio as well as nn, practices what he preaches by engaging fluidly with both embodied and virtual interlocutors simultaneously during his media appearances. Tsuda’s frequent commentary resembles media scholar Kitada Akihiro’s theorization of participation in these rapid-fire online communities as being more about the “pleasure of the social communication itself ” than the topics being discussed."
The book notes on page 75: "For media activist Tsuda Daisuke, this potential defines his interest in interactive technologies; YouTube, NicoNico, and similar platforms can introduce a broad selection of events to a diverse national body and inspire them to protest, volunteer, or otherwise mobilize."
Rodwell, Elizabeth A. (2015). Push the Button: Interactive Television and Collaborative Journalism in Japan (PhD thesis). Duke University. ProQuest2001550937.
The PhD thesis notes on page 4: "Nonetheless, it was interesting to me to see the extent to which the mass media flirted with such individuals, offering more prominent figures such as Uesugi Takashi and Tsuda Daisuke6 regular hosting gigs on (usually BS channel) television programs, and radio stations."
The 6th footnote notes: "In this dissertation I will follow Japanese and anthropological convention when referring to Japanese individuals, and writing their last (family) names before their surnames. According to American convention, Tsuda Daisuke would be Daisuka Tsuda, as Tsuda is his “last” name."
The thesis notes on page 48: "As prominent media activist Tsuda Daisuke writes about NND, its strength lies in its capacity to allow viewers to interact with presenters, and with one another simultaneously. Always seated behind his laptop during broadcasts, Tsuda, who appears regularly on both television and radio as well as NND, practices what he preaches by engaging fluidly with both embodied and virtual commentators during his media appearances–if not on NND, then on Twitter."
The thesis notes on page 117: "From the perspective of prominent (and self-described) media activist Tsuda Daisuke, this capacity represents social media’s inherent strength; YouTube and UStream introduce a diverse selection of events to a diverse national body, whose members may be inspired to take action or become involved."
The thesis notes on page 134: "Thus, it was of great interest to Tsuda that while in 2010 an estimated 1/3 to 1/2 of Japanese computer users engaged social media in any way, Twitter use in particular expanded dramatically between 2010-2012, as individuals sought alternative means by which to exchange written and visual information."
The thesis notes on pages 137–138: "Referring back to the historical absence of a “kifu bunka” (donation culture) in Japan, Tsuda addresses what he believes is a culture in transition: “Korekara ‘kifu’ ga būmu ni naru,” (The ‘donation’ boom is coming) he titles a chapter in one of his recent books. Within his formulation ..., America’s donation culture is one worth emulating. While he praises services like the Japanese crowdfunding website Just Giving, his acquisitiveness about the potentials of a distinctly Japanese means to fundraising leads him to society’s widespread use of Suica cards, ... In the meantime, he acknowledges that social media has made political action easier, but, ..."
The thesis notes on page 140: "Our Planet TV had recently held an FPAJ press conference without suffering negative repercussions, as had the Tsuda Daisuke-affiliated political group “Democracy 2.0”–although both of these groups benefitted from and were somewhat insulated by the accumulated social capital of their most prominent representatives. Tsuda-san and Shiraiishi-san both represent a credible and high quality journalistic body of work, and their integrity generally unquestioned."
The thesis notes on page 160: "In another case, the prominent and self described “media activist” (media akutobisuto), Tsuda Daisuke– instantly recognizable by his platinum-dyed hair (kinpatsu) and sticker-covered laptop–maintains a public schedule of appearances on his website (http://tsuda.ru/); indeed his circulation as a product, and the circulation of his work is sufficient that they must be subcategorized on the basis of television, radio, publications, etc. Like most contemporary media activists, he tweets avidly (@tsuda), and was not only an early adopter of the medium, but a vocal proponent of its adoption as a means to circumvent the mainstream Japanese press."
The abstract notes: "The perspective of artistic director Daisuke Tsuda that understand the necessity of an approach to free up the age of deadlock, and that events as media have great power in that respect is examined. Tsuda may be called a hero of the Internet era, and his new ideas that fully utilize the media and his ability to take action such as reporting symposiums via Twitter have given him quite a reputation. As he composes music, his network is broad. Although his contact with the fields of art and design is not strong, requests for attending panel discussions with artists and designers wanting to hear his story are not few. The unusual matching of Tsuda and artists brought moments of new discoveries and learning experiences to both sides. Thus, journalists and the media should learn how to build relationships between the creativity of the artists and the reality at the venue."
"女性議員の比率向上へ街頭演説 津田大介氏ら" [Street speech to increase the ratio of female lawmakers: Daisuke Tsuda and others]. The Nikkei (in Japanese). 2019-04-10. Archived from the original on 2019-04-11. Retrieved 2024-10-20.
The article notes: "女性議員の比率向上をめざして活動するパリテ・キャンペーン実行委員会は10日、女性の参政権行使73周年を記念し、東京と大阪で街頭宣伝活動を実施した。東京ではジャーナリストの津田大介氏が演説し「男性も具体的な行動を始める必要がある」と述べた。"
From Google Translate: "The Parity Campaign Executive Committee, which works to increase the ratio of female lawmakers, held street campaigns in Tokyo and Osaka on the 10th to commemorate the 73rd anniversary of women's suffrage. In Tokyo, journalist Daisuke Tsuda gave a speech, saying, "Men also need to start taking concrete action.""
The article notes: "３年に１度開く国際芸術祭「あいちトリエンナーレ」の2019年の芸術監督にジャーナリストの津田大介氏（43）が１日付で就任した。"
From Google Translate: "Journalist Daisuke Tsuda (43) was appointed artistic director of the 2019 Aichi Triennale, an international art festival held every three years, effective from the 1st."
"芸術監督に津田大介氏 あいちトリエンナーレ2019" [Daisuke Tsuda appointed artistic director of Aichi Triennale 2019]. The Nikkei (in Japanese). 2017-07-19. Archived from the original on 2017-07-21. Retrieved 2024-10-20.
The article notes: "愛知県は18日、３年に１度開く国際芸術祭「あいちトリエンナーレ2019」の芸術監督に、ジャーナリストで早大教授の津田大介氏（43）が決まったと発表した。就任は８月１日付。芸術分野に詳し…"
From Google Translate: "Aichi Prefecture announced on the 18th that journalist and Waseda University professor Daisuke Tsuda (43) has been appointed artistic director of the Aichi Triennale 2019, an international art festival held every three years. He will take up his post on August 1st. He is well versed in the arts..."
"ウェブで政治参加促す 津田大介さん（殻を破れ） 政治家は「ツール」 誰でも動かせる" [Encouraging political participation through the web - Daisuke Tsuda (Break out of your shell) Politicians are "tools" - anyone can use them]. The Nikkei (in Japanese). 2013-01-01. Archived from the original on 2013-01-05. Retrieved 2024-10-20.
The article notes "指定されたのは六本木ヒルズ49階の一室。ドアを開けると、金髪でパソコンに向かう横顔が飛び込んできた。名刺を交換すると、事務所の住所は庶民的な若者の街、高円寺。話してみると、印象はそちらに近い。ウェブと政治の関係について新たな取り組みを提唱するジャーナリスト、津田大介さん（39）だ。"
From Google Translate: "The designated room was on the 49th floor of Roppongi Hills. When I opened the door, I was greeted by a profile of a blonde man working at a computer. After exchanging business cards, I learned that his office address was in Koenji, a popular young people's town. When we talked, I got the impression that he was close to that. He is Daisuke Tsuda (39), a journalist who advocates a new approach to the relationship between the web and politics."
The interviews contains biographical coverage of the subject. The source notes: "今週ゲストにお迎えしたのは、今年の8月1日から開催される「あいちトリエンナーレ2019」の芸術監督に抜擢された、ジャーナリスト・津田大介さんです。津田大介さんは、1973年東京都のご出身。早稲田大学社会科学部をご卒業後、メディアとジャーナリズム、著作権、コンテンツビジネス、表現の自由などを専門分野として執筆活動を行っていらっしゃいます。近年は地域の振興、社会起業、テクノロジーが社会をどのように変えるかをテーマに取材を続けていらっしゃいます。2013年、世界経済フォーラム（ダボス会議）の「ヤング・グローバル・リーダー」に選出。現在は、早稲田大学文学学術院教授、一般社団法人インターネットユーザー協会の代表理事でもいらっしゃいます。"
From Google Translate: "This week's guest is journalist Daisuke Tsuda, who was appointed artistic director of the Aichi Triennale 2019, which will be held from 1 August this year. Daisuke Tsuda was born in Tokyo in 1973. After graduating from the Faculty of Social Sciences at Waseda University, he has been writing about media and journalism, copyright, content business, and freedom of expression. In recent years, he has continued to cover themes such as regional development, social entrepreneurship, and how technology will change society. In 2013, he was selected as a Young Global Leader by the World Economic Forum (Davos Conference). He is currently a professor at the Faculty of Letters, Arts and Sciences at Waseda University and the representative director of the Internet Users Association."
"ユーチューブ「ポリタスTV」などで活躍する津田大介氏を囲む! 上田市の上田染谷丘高校を昭和38年に卒業した同級生が青木村で同級会！" [Surrounded by Daisuke Tsuda, who is active on YouTube "Politas TV" and other programs! Classmates who graduated from Ueda Someyaoka High School in Ueda City in 1963 hold a class reunion in Aoki Village!]. 東信ジャーナル [Toshin Journal] (in Japanese). 2023-03-12. Archived from the original on 2023-12-07. Retrieved 2024-10-20.
The article notes: "津田大介さんは１９７３年生まれ。ジャーナリスト、メディア・アクティビストとして活躍。ユーチューブ「ポリタスＴＶ」の編集長として政治、経済、芸能など様々な分野の人と対談し、人気上昇中。メディアとジャーナリズム、テクノロジーと社会、表現の自由とネット上の人権侵害、地域課題解決と行政の文化事業、著作権とコンテンツビジネスなどを専門分野として執筆、取材活動を行っている。２０１２年から２０２０年まで放送されたＮＨＫラジオ主婦向け情報ワイド番組「すっぴん」に２０１３年から２０１５年まで担当。"
From Google Translate: "Daisuke Tsuda was born in 1973. He is active as a journalist and media activist. As editor-in-chief of the YouTube channel "Politus TV," he has been interviewing people from various fields such as politics, economics, and entertainment, and his popularity is on the rise. He writes and reports on topics such as media and journalism, technology and society, freedom of expression and human rights violations on the Internet, solving local issues and cultural projects by government, and copyright and content business, all of which are his specialties. From 2013 to 2015, he was in charge of "Suppon," an information program for housewives on NHK Radio that aired from 2012 to 2020."
"新サイト「ポリタス」で政治を可視化する！ 編集長・津田大介氏に使い方と狙いを聞いた" [Make politics visible with the new website "Politas"! We asked editor-in-chief Tsuda Daisuke about how to use it and what it aims to achieve]. Diamond Weekly [ja] (in Japanese). 2013-07-18. Archived from the original on 2024-03-03. Retrieved 2024-10-20.
The article notes: "7月16日、政治家の審議会や国会、各種メディアでの発言を集め、トピックごとに分類して表示する新政治メディア、「ポリタス」のスマートフォン版が正式にオープンした。企画、制作、編集を務めるのがジャーナリストでメディア・アクティビストの津田大介氏。"
From Google Translate: "On 16 July, the smartphone version of "Politas," a new political media that collects politicians' comments from councils, the Diet, and various media, and displays them by topic, was officially launched. Journalist and media activist Tsuda Daisuke is in charge of planning, production, and editing."
The article notes: "つだ・だいすけ 1973年生まれ。早稲田大学社会科学部卒業。ジャーナリスト、メディア・アクティビスト。一般社団法人インターネットユーザー協 会（MIAU）代表理事。主な著書に『ウェブで政治を動かす！』（朝日新書）、『Twitter社会論』（洋泉社新書y）など多数。2011年9月より週刊メールマガジン「津田大介の『メディアの現場』」を配信中"
From Google Translate: "Tsuda Daisuke Born in 1973. Graduated from Waseda University's School of Social Sciences. Journalist and media activist. Representative director of the Japan Internet Users Association (MIAU). His main publications include "Moving politics with the web!" (Asahi Shinsho) and "Social theory on Twitter" (Yosensha Shinsho y). He has been distributing the weekly email magazine "Daisuke Tsuda's 'Media on the Ground'" since September 2011."
Keep Great work on that breakdown of available sources from Cunard, I find it thoroughly convincing that sufficient sources exist to merit a keep. Absurdum4242 (talk) 10:29, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That wasn't canvassing. I had no intention of influencing them to !vote a certain way, but simply to request to assess the sources. I have seen their translation work on other AfDs, and they often !vote delete also. Can you indicate where in that message I asked them to !vote keep? You can't and you won't because I didn't. Please stop with the bad-faith WP:ASPERSIONS. Left guide (talk) 11:10, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, WP:APPNOTE: Appropriate notifications on the user talk pages of concerned editors…include:
*Editors who have made substantial edits to the topic or article
*Editors who have participated in previous discussions on the same topic (or closely related topics)
You can go through Cunard's edits and it's clear they are a regular AfD participant who has substantially made edits relating to the topic of translating sources from foreign languages.
Ridiculous excuses. Cunard is not an expert in "translating sources". Cunard is usually doing excellent work locating sources, which are then, if needed, google-translated. But the guideline demands expertise in the field of the article's subject, in which Cunard is not. Also, Cunard has not made any edits to the article, let alone "substantial edits." And Cunard has not participated in any discussion related to the article's subject. If anything, Cunard is well known in the AfD pages for providing sources in support of Keep. And you have been the strongest and most persistent supporter of Keep in this AfD. (I have no horse in this specific race.) You have engaged in canvassing and the least you could do is to admit it and see how or if we can move on. -The Gnome (talk) 12:06, 21 October 2024 (UTC) Modified at 12:17 after subsequent replies were made. Left guide (talk) 12:26, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There in no need to explicitly demand help to Keep. Take my advice and admit the blatantly evident canvassing. You are only making things worse for yourself. -The Gnome (talk) 12:17, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@The Gnome:clear & blatant case of canvassing Strong disagree. Left guide made one request, which was neutrally worded, short, and to the point. It fails all the criteria for WP:INAPPNOTE. What you list as "exceptions" is the opposite: a list of positive criteria. While satisfying them is desirable, there is nothing in the guideline that says these criteria are exhaustive. Left guide's request was in keeping with the spirit of the guideline.
On the other hand, your demand here that Left guide be penalized actually goes against the guideline: politely request that the user(s) responsible for the canvassing stop posting notices (my emphasis). I suggest you drop it. If you don't, take it to ANI. You may to consider that carefully, though. Paradoctor (talk) 14:06, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As much as I think Harrison's writing about Wikipedia is insightful, I simply don't think he passes WP:NJOURNALIST. He's not really been the subject of significant coverage. I don't think interviews or reviews of his books in student newspapers (Student Life) are sigcov. The Fix interview might be significant coverage, but I am unfamiliar with the publication. 1A is a podcast interview, which I don't think counts for notability. The Salon, Slate and HuffPost links are just to his journalism and obviously don't count. The New America link is the description of an event that Harrison was participating in, and I don't think its sigcov either. The WashU entry is a "look what one of our alumni is up to" post and therefore it's not independent or sigcov. The Yahoo interview is part of the Yahoo for Creators program, which has an unclear level of editorial control from Yahoo itself, and may be published with little editorial oversight like WP:FORBESCON, but I'm not sure, and I think its status as significant coverage is questionable. Hemiauchenia (talk) 00:00, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I don't find much beyond articles he's penned. Seems notable, but I don't find any sourcing we can use. Article now is mostly sourced to author profiles. Oaktree b (talk) 01:21, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: With the publication of The Editors, Harrison satisfies #3 under creative professionals. I also just added two more sources, including an ABC affiliateWFAAand NBC Bay Area. 1A (radio program) is not a podcast, it's a radio program. -Wil540 art (talk) 02:38, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Editors hasn't even received a proper book review by a professional outlet so I hardly see how it passes the part of #3 that says such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews. The book was notably also deleted when taken to AfD, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Editors (novel). I hardly see how being a guest on a radio or local television program is enough to pass GNG. Hemiauchenia (talk) 04:26, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I mostly agree with Oaktree above. Simply having published a book is definitely not enough to meet point 3 of WP:NCREATIVE, especially when that book's coverage has been pretty minimal. Going through the article's sources - author pages don't establish anything, the Yahoo article is misleading as it's aggregated from a Substack, and I would not consider alumni magazines to be sufficiently WP:INDEPENDENT. There may eventually be enough coverage for an article on his book, but it doesn't seem like there's enough here for an article on him. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me!02:34, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify per WP:ATD as it's possibly just a bit WP:TOOSOON. Continue adding coverage to the article as it is published, such as book reviews and author profiles. If no one updates for six months, it will get deleted. But if sufficient sources are added, it can get moved back into mainspace. Cielquiparle (talk) 20:59, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-advertorialized article about a filmmaker, not properly referencing any strong claim to passing inclusion criteria for filmmakers. The attempted notability claim here is that his work exists, which is not an automatic notability freebie in and of itself -- we would need to see some evidence of distinction, such as notable awards and/or WP:GNG-worthy coverage and analysis about him and his work in media and/or books. But this is referenced entirely to primary sources self-published by people or organizations directly affiliated with the statements they're referencing, which is not support for notability, and the article claims absolutely nothing about him that would be "inherently" notable without better sourcing for it than this. Further, there are no inbound links here from any other page in Wikipedia but the disambiguation page at Bob Connolly, and this appears to be a conflict of interest as the creator (who created it in 2013 and has occasionally returned to edit the article as recently as August 2024) appears to have self-identified as Bob Connolly in past posts to Talk:Lee Aaron, but even people who do properly pass our notability and sourcing standards still aren't entitled to write or curate their own articles themselves. Bearcat (talk) 19:35, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Tesleemah At the moment, there are no reliable sources on Google News that covers him significantly, and independently. You are welcome to update the page and make it qualify as per WP:HEYMAN. But, please avoid using interviews or self-quotations. Charlie (talk) 07:45, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Tesleemah, for good or ill, the burden falls on editors wanting to Keep the article to bring reliable sources to the article or to the AFD discussion. Just saying that good sources exist carries no weight at all if you don't provide evidence of what they are. Other editors are not responsible for finding evidence to support your argument. LizRead!Talk!03:21, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. He co-founded NASSCOM (about which we have an article) with half a dozen or six dozen others. He wrote a book. The book was well received, and we have an article on it. He is apparently a somewhat-known name in India, anyway, but for the purposes of his article, he does not seem to pass GNG, as the coverage I've found tends to be either in-passing mentions or non-independent. The article itself is quite dreadful, as it happens, but it's not worth trying to repair his resumé at his current level of demonstrated notability. — JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits)08:11, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting. A lot of work has gone into this article since its nomination, can we get a review here? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk!21:05, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Every single citation has Dejan Crnomarković as the author. Is this a misunderstanding of how citations are made? It looks like a delete anyway because the sources seem to be of low quality, WP:PRIMARY, WP:ROUTINE etc. Geschichte (talk) 07:51, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
FA
A
GA
