Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Journalism

David Michael Conner (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)

Autobiography of a journalist, reads like a CV. The sources are all about articles he has written, but there are no articles about him. None of the WP:NJOURNALIST criteria apply and neither WP:ANYBIO. The writer's own works are not independent so no WP:GNG pass. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:53, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Journalism, and Washington, D.C.. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:53, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete The first thing its creator did on WP was this page. Per nom, CV-like, lacks WP:GNG SIGCOV. A journalist journalisting is not notable. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 10:17, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: The entire article reads like a resume, which goes against Wikipedia's guidelines, as it is not a platform for personal resumes. As such, it does not meet Wikipedia's general notability criteria (WP:GNG). Baqi:) (talk) 13:29, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Khosi Twala (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)

Reality television participant of Big Brother Titans who does not appear to have received coverage outside of the show. Appears to fail WP:GNG/WP:ENT at this point of time. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:40, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Television, and South Africa. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:40, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Big Brother Titans: Per nom. The description states that she's a TV personality, entrepreneur, journalist, model and influencer. However, there's no reference to back that statement. Big Brother is not even a talent show. This was just 15 minutes of fame. dxneo (talk) 16:09, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:51, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gareth Dennis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article came up at ANI, due to an IP address making inappropriate edits, and on closer inspection I don't think that the subject is notable. The article asserts that he has lectured at a couple of academic institutions, but he doesn't appear to be currently employed at either of them, and that wouldn't constitute an WP:NPROF pass anyway. His dismissal from a railway engineering firm was covered in the national press, but WP:BLP1E. He has written a book, but the reviews I'm finding for that are written on activist websites, railway fan forums and the like - it's not an WP:NAUTHOR pass. That leaves us with the idea that he is notable because he is interviewed in the press from time to time about matters concerning railway transportation; I'm not persuaded that that constitutes notability for our purposes. He may become notable in the future, if his writing attracts significant critical attention, but to my mind this article is premature. Girth Summit _(blether) 11:33, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and United Kingdom. Girth Summit _(blether) 11:33, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Journalism, Politics, Engineering, Scotland, and Wales. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:47, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Week redirect to Peter Hendy#Network Rail, where his sacking is covered. Despite enjoying his work, I have to agree that at present Dennis doesn't quite have enough coverage (per WP:BLP1E) to merit a standalone article (although I personally don't think he's too far off). Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 13:02, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Doesn't seem to pass author notability for "How Railways will fix the Future", this is the only sort of "critical review" I could find [1] and I'm not sure if that even counts as a RS. Getting fired isn't terribly notable. I don't see him passing academic notability either. I'm not sure what's left for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 14:58, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Just to be clear, I think trains are great, and the subject's advocacy and passion are probably for the good. But being interviewed a lot, getting sacked for maybe not choosing his words carefully enough, and writing one book with apparently one review (in something called Counterfire, "a revolutionary socialist organisation committed to transforming our society from one based on the profit motive to one built on the needs of working people" [2]), aren't even close to notability material. It's worth pointing out that the subject himself has edited the article recently, so we can assume that any worthwhile sources are already present in the article. EEng 16:20, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Just to be fair, as far as I can tell, Dennis only made two edits in August, which amounted to a change of the nationality of his father, which in the timeline of this article doesn't seem very recent. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 16:30, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I wasn't implying there was anything wrong with his edits. My point was simply that you can count on the subject to have added to the article any missing significant sources about himself, if any existed. (Or he might have raised them on the talk page.) EEng 16:47, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I don't think we can assume that. If there was an article on me, I probably wouldn't edit it or its talk page point blank as far as possible. If there was something bad enough that I felt I did need to do something I would likely stick to the talk page etc but whatever I did, would still only edit in relation to these important issues. And no matter how much else I felt was missing I likely wouldn't do anything about it, not even posting sources on the talk page. I'm not sure if I'd worry too much about the nationality of my father myself, but it can be a big deal for some. Nil Einne (talk) 14:14, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:42, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I think it's worth noting the book is only being published this month so it could be a case of WP:TOOSOON as far as reviews go. For this reason, if it can't be kept, I would support a redirect for now per @Cakelot1:'s suggestion. Starklinson (talk) 20:00, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment and suggestion: stories about him are front page news in UK national newspapers today, please can we wait a while to make a decision, there are many new refs to add and very likely more in the next days. John Cummings (talk) 12:37, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I very much doubt if any newspaper, anywhere in the world has front-page, today, that isn't entirely One Story. In terms of update, itself, it doesn't seem to change the WP:BLP1E calculation (it being an update to the "Hendy event"). Is your impression that we are likely to get any stories about Gareth, that don't concern his firing/Hendy? Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 13:11, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Cakelot1 This was the leading story of front page of the Guardian yesterday morning, at least when you accessed it from the UK. I've added some of the info into the article with this ref. John Cummings (talk) 09:12, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  This is off topic, but I guess when somebody says a front page news, I still think there talking about the print editions (which were pretty uniform in being about the elections). Certainly when I went to the Grauniad website yesterday the first screen I got (from the UK) was all US election stories/widgets and had to scroll to see anything else, but I guess that would also depend on size, etc. All of which is besides the point about the 1E-ness of the article. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 09:40, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Bear in mind when newspapers were being prepared for Wednesday morning in the UK, it's fairly likely all that there was to say about the US election, was something like "Americans vote in monumental election" so it's not particularly surprising they had a lot of room for other stuff on their front pages. I'm sure their Thursday papers and any evening or other late editions might be different. Nil Einne (talk) 14:01, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The point remains though that this is still BLP1E - it looks like he ended up getting sacked because a government minister complained to his boss about something he said in an interview; that (now former) government minister has apologised, and that apology is resulting in news coverage. We can (and do) cover those controversial events in the article about the politician (although it looks like that might need a bit of updating in light of today's coverage), but it doesn't follow that we need an article about the individual who lost his job. Girth Summit _(blether) 14:21, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Girth Summit do you think there are enough refs to recreate an article on the situation? John Cummings (talk) 09:12, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Do you mean an article on the scandal / controversy? I don't have a view on whether or not it would be possible, but I doubt it worthwhile - as scandals involving government ministers go, it's pretty low level. Mentioning it at the page about him is probably worthwhile, but I wouldn't go further than that personally, and I've written some low-traffic articles in my time! Girth Summit _(blether) 09:19, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Peter Hendy#Network Rail: Per above... About me; Talk to me. Farewell fellow editor... 13:23, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Request If the article is approved for deletion please 'draftify' it instead, I want to work on it. John Cummings (talk) 09:12, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  There's nothing stopping you making a user space copy of it yourself right now, provided you follow the guidelines at WP:CWW. If this closes as redirect, as seems likely at this point, you would then be able to work on it in your user space, and copy back across to the article title when the subject clearly passes notability criteria. I'd appreciate a courtesy ping if you do that, but I can't require that of you. Girth Summit _(blether) 09:32, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Girth Summit I'm requesting this because I want to catch the most developed version of this article if it dissappears, given that its currently covered in the news it seems likely it will change in the next days. — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Cummings (talk • contribs) 09:38, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, whoever closes the discussion can make that call; I guess it could be draftified/userfied and then a redirect put in its current title place if that's the decision. Girth Summit _(blether) 15:45, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John Cummings, when the time comes, make a request at WP:REFUND for the text to be emailed . EEng 18:19, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that waiting for a deletion decision is best. A copy/paste drafting would lack the version history, which might hold information that's useful in the future. A page move isn't appropriate during the AfD discussion. But that's essentially the best outcome for @John Cummings. I just !voted delete, but this is a sincere comment. Cheers! JFHJr (㊟) 00:05, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Per nom and Oaktree b. This subject fails all available notability thresholds. It might be WP:TOOSOON; you never know. JFHJr (㊟) 23:58, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  & userfy/draft for @John Cummings. JFHJr (㊟) 00:08, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Peter Hendy#Network Rail, as the sacking seems to be the main source of notability now. If delete & redirect is the outcome then I'd be happy with userifying the latest version for John Cummings to keep on working on it; if the book becomes notable by reviews, then the content of this article might be useful background, but with only a single authored book, WP:AUTHOR isn't going to be met for Dennis himself, even if multiple mainstream reviews are later published. Espresso Addict (talk) 05:05, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect/Draftify It's all the same one story. The issue is Hendy's behaviour really. Secretlondon (talk) 13:54, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anthony Furey (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable political candidate and journalist. Wellington Bay (talk) 03:03, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Journalism, Conservatism, and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:09, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He's a non-notable failed political candidate. Unless he sets a record for most loses, he isn't notable. He is a fringe journalist, not considered mainstream. Abebenjoe (talk) 08:31, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note to closer: the above should be counted as Delete. Wellington Bay (talk) 14:03, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - WP:POLITICIAN who only garnered 4.96% of the vote when he ran for mayor. His career as journalist and political commentator doesn't seem to have been notable. — Maile (talk) 13:30, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - I think his notability goes beyond his political candidacies, due to his controversial view points. He's gotten a lot of attention, and as a result there are quite a few reliable sources to draw from.-- Earl Andrew - talk 14:22, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. People do not get articles just for standing as candidates in elections they didn't win — the notability bar at WP:NPOL is holding a notable political office, not just running for one, while candidates get articles only if they already had preexisting notability for some other reason that would already have gotten them an article anyway.
  So the only basis on which he might qualify for inclusion is as a journalist, not as a political candidate, but this article is not establishing that he would have any strong claim to passing our notability criteria for journalists. Even the stuff about his controversial views hasn't been a big subject of reliable source coverage in its own right, as I'm not finding a whole lot of coverage and analysis about his journalistic career: even on a Google search I'm just seeing mentions of his journalistic work as background in the campaign coverage, and glancing namechecks of his existence as a person with opinions in coverage of events he had opinions about, neither of which are support for notability as a journalist. But I'm not finding hits where "Anthony Furey says controversial thing" is the subject of any significant coverage in its own right, which is the kind of sourcing we would actually need to see to support notability on that basis.
  Also, note that this article usurped an already-existing redirect to Aussie rules footballer Tony Furey, which is not proper Wikipedia process — even if there were a strong basis for an article about Anthony Furey as a journalist, it would have to be created at a disambiguated title, not as a hijacking of a redirect that was already in place to represent somebody else, and then we could have a renaming discussion about whether he was sufficiently notable to take over WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for the name or not. But we should delete this first, and then restore the redirect to Tony Furey afterward, rather than leaving this inside the redirect's edit history. Bearcat (talk) 14:40, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Previously discussed at 2023 Toronto mayoral by-election, where his performance was not considered notable enough for an article to be created. I do not consider that he is a) notable under WP:NPOL (he hasn't won two elections, winning under 5% of the vote (just about finishing 4th) at the 2023 Toronto mayoral by-election) b) notable under WP:JOURNALIST (he is a newspaper columnist) Turini2 (talk) 16:13, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Allie Raffa (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)

The subject might not meet WP:SIGCOV. I see some sources about her, but it might be an instance of WP:TOOSOON. Many of the sources are from her university or employer. TJMSmith (talk) 19:18, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Politicians, Women, Journalism, Florida, and Washington, D.C.. TJMSmith (talk) 19:18, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep may be notable as many other journalists; some sources do exist as my quick google search shows, but I'm not good at evaluating journalistBLPs. --25lucky (talk) 15:54, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. This is a journalist at the very beginning of a career, and like an assistant professor, we almost never keep such articles as being too soon. Bearian (talk) 09:22, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ilan Lukatch (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

BLP of a journalist that seems to me to lack support from in depth coverage in independent sources. Appears borderline so bringing here for consensus. Mccapra (talk) 19:45, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism and Israel. Mccapra (talk) 19:45, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Television. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:50, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. There are 10 independent sources in the Hebrew article, which, together, seem sufficient to establish notability. Whizkin (talk) 11:58, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes but the ten sources in Hebrew are absolutely dire:

1. Is a piece by him, not independent coverage of him

2. Is a passing mention of him in a band he played in in 1988

3. Doesn’t mention him

4. Passing mention in a brief listing

5. Passing mention

6. Doesn’t mention him

7. Doesn’t mention him

8. Interview with him (his first interview ever)

9. Decent, if rather brief, third party source

10. No longer accessible but looks decent.

That’s not enough to build a stand alone bio article on and it does look like the original creator of the Hebrew article was desperately scraping around for any mention they could find. Mccapra (talk) 13:29, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that those sources are sub-optimal. Whizkin (talk) 18:21, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. OR biography of a professional at work. The Hebrew article is refbombed. Our article is shorter, so there are less references, yet what we have is equally a mixed bag. gidonb (talk) 03:39, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Emmanuel Chain (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)

Reviewed during NPP. No indication of wp:notability under SNG or GNG. Article was tagged for UPE by others and creator is indeffed as a sock. Article content is just basic resume/CV type material. I translated the 4 sources although do not have a full understanding of the context of the websites. Two are so flowery that they appear to be self-written. Could not find even one GNG qualifying reference. North8000 (talk) 17:36, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, Television, and France. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:45, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: a fairly notable TV host; see sources in French. He does EASILY meet the requirements for notability and I am surprised to read no sources have been identified. Examples? https://www.liberation.fr/futurs/2003/05/20/emmanuel-chain-quitte-capital_434225/ https://www.liberation.fr/medias/2003/08/30/en-vitrine-emmanuel-chain-le-dessein-d-animer_443372/ https://www.letemps.ch/cyber/presentateur-capital-emmanuel-chain-quitte-m6?srsltid=AfmBOorshQ4A-QuUZu2qoDHWTH0tQmmASHLg8i4BwDSNJIXbEX-K783l https://www.lemonde.fr/archives/article/2003/06/01/emmanuel-chain-le-travail-et-le-capital_4277967_1819218.html https://www.leparisien.fr/culture-loisirs/emmanuel-chain-encourageant-02-09-2003-2004357796.php etc, etc, etc. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:22, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:32, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Wit the Fr sources given, should have enough for notability. This is a career retrospective [3], which also helps. Oaktree b (talk) 00:10, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: The FR wiki article also has several sources in RS, which could be imported here. Oaktree b (talk) 00:11, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Paul Ingles (via WP:PROD on 22 January 2024)