Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elsa D'Silva

< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion
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 delete. Fundamentally the source analysis shows this does not meet our inclusion standard and none of the keep votes deliver a compelling refutation to this. Policy trumps opinion everytime. Spartaz Humbug! 19:53, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Elsa D'Silva

edit

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Elsa D'Silva (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails GNG and NBIO. I could not find any in depth coverage in independent reliable sources. Interviews and self-authored articles do not count towards notability. M4DU7 (talk) 07:57, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. M4DU7 (talk) 07:57, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. M4DU7 (talk) 07:57, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. M4DU7 (talk) 07:57, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Guardian - Zero coverage on D'Silva. It only quotes her talking about Safecity.
  • NY Mag - Again just quotes her talking about Safecity.
  • Times of India - Only slightly better. Apart from the quotes, the journalist gives a tiny bit of additional info: "D’Silva, who is incidentally a revenue management specialist in aviation, says..."
  • Deccan Herald - Similar to the previous one, the journalist only gives half a line of additional info: "...says co-founder and managing director D’Silva, a former aviation professional who made a career switch to the developmental sector only few years ago."
  • BBC - A namedrop.
  • SheThePeople - This article is entirely about Safecity and quotes D'Silva promoting it. Zero in-depth coverage on her.
  • Mint - Probably the best source of the lot. This article covers how Safecity initiative works and has brief coverage of the plans of D'Silva and her team. All the coverage here is in context of the organization.
  • Al Jazeera - carries a two-sentence statement made by her within quotation marks.
  • Aspen Ideas - brief routine coverage (speaker profile).
None of these sources come close to providing in-depth coverage on D'Silva. The keep votes should be given given due weight, considering people are apparently being offered money on another site to vote keep on this AFD. A couple of the votes above are suspicious to say the least. M4DU7 (talk) 08:38, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
WP:ATTP discussion
@M4DU7: Do you have any evidence to suggest that any keep !voters are single-purpose accounts or canvassed into this discussion in violation of the guideline? Beccaynr (talk) 20:30, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Who said anything about single purpose accounts? There was literally a job posting offering money to vote keep on this AFD. M4DU7 (talk) 08:06, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment In the 'not a ballot' template I placed in this discussion, suspected SPA and canvassed accounts are two issues listed, and you raised 'suspicions' about keep !voters, so I am asking if you have any specific evidence to not WP:AGF about anyone participating in this discussion. Also, please do not move my comment again - I placed it here because you raise a serious concern, and this is a direct reply intended to assist the discussion. Beccaynr (talk) 12:42, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
User:Rich Smith brought our attention to a job posting on a freelancing site titled "Need more freelacers keep votes". That is a solid piece of evidence for canvassing and paid editing in my books (I'm not accusing you BTW). But, please follow WP:THREAD. Makes it easier for editors to keep track of all your replies. M4DU7 (talk) 09:29, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In my experience, accusations of paid editing, sockpuppets, etc without actual evidence is often a way for someone to try to explain how their AfD, which seemed so obvious to them, is quite clearly non-obvious to several other people. Hyperion35 (talk) 21:28, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In your experience? You have made one mainspace edit since April 2013. I'm glad that I'm not the only one who has suspicions on your editing patterns. M4DU7 (talk) 09:21, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I am a state government employee. If I were to accept money to edit Wikipedia, or any other form of outside employment for that matter, I would have to fill out multiple disclosure forms with my employer (and they would probably refuse to allow it). Paid editing by me would violate real-world laws, enforced by far more than just WikiCourt. Also, while I have no clue what the going rate is for paid Wikipedia editing, it is almost certainly well below my pay grade. As for the editor you reference, he filed for a review of his AfD, where he accused almost every single Keep vote as being either a sock or UPE, while supplying only laughable evidence. His "evidence" that my vote was paid for was that it was my first edit in several years, and he made no effort whatsoever to dispute my actual vote. Oh, and as for my experience? I have been editing Wikipedia on and off since 2008? Might be 2007? I'd have to double-check my edit history. Hyperion35 (talk) 17:54, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I also think there is a major difference between using interviews as primary sources to support content (which would not support notability per WP:BASIC) and using the rest of an article that provides commentary and additional reporting to support the notability of the subject the news outlet has found noteworthy. As discussed in the essay WP:INTERVIEW, "An independent interviewer represents the "world at large" giving attention to the subject, and as such, interviews as a whole contribute to the basic concept of notability. The material provided to the interview by the interviewer and the publication is secondary." Trying to ignore the significant amount of coverage that D'Silva and her work have received seems contrary to the spirit and intent of the notability guidelines. Beccaynr (talk) 04:03, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
WP:INTERVIEW is an essay, and essays do not supercede policies and guidelines. Since we're discussing essays, please list WP:THREE best reliable sources that have covered this individual significantly and independently. M4DU7 (talk) 08:30, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Per WP:ONLYESSAY, "Essays, in general, serve to summarize a position, opinion or argument." With my reference to WP:INTERVIEW, one of the issues I was trying to highlight is what I think is an inappropriate disregard of the secondary commentary and reporting on D'Silva, which includes her work and accomplishments, in multiple independent and reliable sources, which supports her notability per WP:BASIC, as quoted above in my first comment in this discussion. Per WP:SECONDARY, "A secondary source provides an author's own thinking based on primary sources, generally at least one step removed from an event. It contains an author's analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis of the facts, evidence, concepts, and ideas taken from primary sources." (emphasis in the original). Therefore, for example, there is significant and in-depth commentary and reporting on D'Silva, her work, and her accomplishments in:

When Safecity started mapping sexual violence in public spaces in India six years ago, it found public toilets in the Sanjay camp slum of Delhi were hotspots for attacks. “We wondered why,” says Elsa D’Silva, Safecity’s founder. “Then we realised the toilet doors were missing.”

When women went to the toilets – the only option for many people in the area – local boys would hang around nearby, take video clips of them on their phones and shout comments. So the women were drinking less water and only using the toilets late at night, risking an attack in the darkness.

Armed with data from the Safecity app, which was set up after 23-year-old student Jyoti Singh Pandey was beaten, gang raped and tortured on a bus in Delhi in 2012, local residents and students pressured the police into fixing the toilets. But they didn’t stop there; they also sat with local boys and showed them the harm they were causing.

What happened next? The community, including many of the boys, came together to pressure the authorities to take women’s safety seriously. And it worked; the toilets were given doors, and fewer assaults have been recorded.

Safecity now operates in five cities in India – Mumbai, Delhi, Pune, Patna and Ahmedabad – and continues to digitally map incidents of sexual assault based on anonymous reports to the app by victims.

D’Silva is not alone in her mission to transform public spaces into welcoming places for women. Around the world, women are creating databases, blogs and heatmaps to document street harassment.

[...] As demonstrated by the #MeToo and #TimesUp movements, where women share experiences of sexual harassment on social media, reporting personal stories can raise awareness. It can also change the way you think about the incident.

[...] Recording and mapping data also gives activists something tangible to work with. “You can monitor it, draw trends, and use it in a structured way at a local level,” says D’Silva. “And when people take ownership of their own neighbourhood they feel empowered to take on bigger problems.” [...] “I want reporting of sexual violence to be mainstream,” says D’Silva. “There’s still a taboo around it.”

No one should plan their schedule around avoiding sexual harassment, but that doesn’t mean many people don’t do exactly that. Whether it’s taking an indirect route to avoid a poorly lit park or opting for a private car instead of risking inappropriate comments or touching on public transportation, vulnerable populations around the world — for the sake of the following examples, women — are constantly maneuvering themselves around their abusers, taking time out of their own pursuits to accommodate the behavior of would-be harassers. But to do so, women must first know where they can and can’t go, information that until recently could only be learned through personal experience or by word of mouth.

“It’s very easy for us to subconsciously adjust our movements, our behavior, and our mobility to not deal with sexual violence,” said Elsa D’Silva, founder of SafeCity, a crowdsourced mapping platform for individuals in India, Kenya, Cameroon, and Nepal to report abuse anonymously. SafeCity, along with platforms like HarassMap in Egypt, #WalkFreely in Kosovo, HarassTracker in Lebanon, and the Rapid Response Unit from Society Without Violence in Armenia all provide women with the opportunity to share their story, pinpoint the exact location where abuse took place, and raise awareness about the pervasiveness of gender-based violence in their countries, on both a broad and hyperlocal scale. To users, these apps and websites act as guides, enabling women to have a greater sense of agency in determining their own safety, as well as providing them with confirmation that they’re not alone.

[...] SafeCity, which is an initiative of the Red Dot Foundation, launched a custom-made iOS and Android app last year — although the majority of their stories are still gathered through face-to-face interactions, either at workshops or on the ground in low-income communities. After collecting the stories in person, representatives from the organization upload the information to the platform. Reports are then assigned categories such as stalking, taking pictures, commenting, indecent exposure, touching/groping, and rape/sexual assault, which can then be filtered by users.

“Even if it’s anonymous reporting, it helps you identify the extent of the problem,” explains D’Silva. While the outpouring of stories that resulted from the #MeToo movement’s initial call to action demonstrated the pervasiveness of gender-based violence, the responses were impossible to analyze and present in any cohesive manner.

SafeCity uses a single depository for all of its entries, making it possible to easily consolidate the findings and locate patterns, such as sexual harassment hot spots like public transportation, street markets, and schools. That was the case in Kibera, a slum in Kenya’s capital of Nairobi, where Kenyan activist Jane Anyango used the cluster of SafeCity entries around schools to confirm stories of widespread abuse of girls by their male teachers. She included the platform’s data in formal reports, leading her to work with local education authorities in creating safe spaces for the students and with the children directly to train them how to recognize sexual violence and respond to it. Anyango now has a project with the United Nations Population Fund to conduct similar work within 45 of Kibera’s schools.

Since SafeCity’s data is open, community members, media, and government officials can access and analyze the citizen-generated reports. In the past, that has taken the form of alerting the police, holding community interventions, or providing the information to authorities who can implement infrastructure improvements to cut down on assaults in public places. “Data provides the evidence necessary to convince these stakeholders that they need to do something about it,” says D’Silva.

Since SafeCity was started 2012, it has accrued over 10,000 reports from more than 50 cities worldwide. [...]

Clearly, gender-based violence and the attitudes surrounding women in general need to change. However, until that happens, crowdsourced maps like #WalkFreely and SafeCity can help arm women with the knowledge they need to stay safe.

Towards Creating Safer Cities, Deccan Herald, 2015

December 16, 2012 was a turning point for many women and their understanding of sexual violence in the country, owing to the wide reportage in the aftermath of the Nirbhaya rape case. One of them was Elsa D’ Silva who was aghast with stories of women who go through such ordeals on an everyday basis. “Disturbed with the conversations” and understanding the need to do more than voicing her concerns on a blog, she decided to launch safecity.in. Crowdsourcing stories of sexual violence faced by women, and compiling them as a valid documentation, the three-year-old campaign focuses on making public places safer for women. “Safecity began as a way to engage with each other on a long-term basis. It began because we saw that many of us had the same experiences but were choosing not to talk about it. It encourages women and girls to talk about these instances because it is critical to break the silence around sexual harassment — and document it. Official statistics do not reflect the true nature and size of the problem partly because of under-reporting,” says co-founder and managing director D’Silva, a former aviation professional who made a career switch to the developmental sector only few years ago.

Working with the open source software Ushahidi for information collection, visualisation and interactive crowdmapping, the campaign has a large database of incidents, which are geo-tagged and show up as location-based trends.

Though initially conceived as an online-only platform, they partner with other NGOs, citizen and student groups to mobilise the community around the issue using the data. “We use the data to identify factors that lead to behaviour causing sexual violence and help us think through approaches for solutions like changing patrol timings, installing streetlights at hotspots,” points out D’Silva.

Now with a benchmark of over 6,000 stories from over 50 cities in India, Kenya and Nepal, it has recently collaborated with Twitter India to aid women in Delhi, Mumbai and Goa with support from the police forces in these regions initially and “gradually pan across India”. “Twitter is the new-age tool for activism that reaches scores of people in real-time. Our movement will gain further momentum with a live public platform. We are confident that we will be able to encourage more women to come forward and break their silence, share their stories and inspire others to take action,” D’Silva tells Metrolife.

What makes a city, a locality safe or unsafe? As stakeholders, members of the community how do we ensure that the area we live in does not account for crimes against women? Safecity, a non-governmental organization founded by former aviation professional ElsaMarie D’Silva, works as a platform for people to share their personal stories of sexual harassment and abuse in public spaces. This data, which can be reported anonymously, helps in creating hot spots on a map indicating trends at a local level.

Elsa says, “The idea is to make this data available for individuals, communities and the local administration to be able to probe and bring about social and systemic change in our cities.”

Since, some people are reticent to open up and recount their experiences (anonymously as well) on their own on the website, a lot of the data made available was gathered by the SafeCity team by organizing workshops and campaigns on sexual harassments within communities for people to join, interact and open up about their own experiences as well.

And documentation is the first step towards bringing about tangible change.

“For e.g. in Bandra, we were able to alter the patrol timings, in the absence of which harassments cases were on the rise. In Delhi, in an area called Lal Kuan, a lot of women were molested when they were in the bushes to release themselves. There were, in fact, toilets for women in the area but the authorities didn’t want to maintain them and kept them under lock and key. But at our insistence, with concrete data in our hands, this was changed,” she informs.

The website, currently made available in Mumbai, Delhi and Pune, aspires to bring about an attitudinal and behavioral shift among stakeholders, when it comes to discussing issues pertaining to sexual violence which are relevant for their neighborhood.

Elsa says, “There is an inherent fear of being judged and in order to change that we make our Twitter handle available a single person to be in charge for a week. This way, we have had urban planners, environmentalists, students; homemakers share their stories through the social media.”

Instead of providing justice to a single person, SafeCity is working towards challenging larger trends. If there are repeated instances of sexual abuse in colleges, they take it up. Recently, they got in touch with the multiplex chain, PVR Cinemas, as someone had informed them of being molested at one of their premises.

“Instead of treating it as negative publicity, the concerned authorities at PVR took it up seriously and made the necessary enquiries. When a popular brand is willing to go that distance, it speaks volumes about the change that is underway when it comes to dealing with such crimes,” adds Elsa.

Within the next month SafeCity is planning to launch its mobile application and also create an real-time account with Twitter India, through which any act of sexual violence can be reported directly to the police, via the handle.

Red Dot Foundation aka Safecity and the UN invite undergraduate students to design an innovative and implementable plan to build safer cities for women and other minorities

While cities are considered spaces of liberation and collaboration, they are not as inclusive of all parties that live within them. With the fear of sexual harassment, violence and misogyny holding women (and other minorities) back from participating in building the blocks of a booming metropolis, tech non-profit Red Dot Foundation aka Safecity and UN Habitat (the United Nations Human Settlements Programme) have created a program for young people to counter it.

The Youth Design Innovation Challenge seeks to involve young people in the fight to solving gender equality issues. The challenge aims to spread awareness about inequality and its intersection with sustainable and safe transportation, environmental conditions, urban planning and governance and then create solutions that are innovative and practical.

“We need a city not just to live and work in but also play in,” explains Elsa D’Silva, founder and CEO of Safecity. “That determines the quality of life. Unfortunately for half that population (non-male) there is no access to safe public spaces or transport, many times mobility is restricted resulting in fewer opportunities to explore one’s potential. It is neither fair nor a conducive environment to exercise one’s civic rights.” The Youth Design Innovation Challenge was created as part of the United Nation’s Safe Cities and Safe Public Spaces program.Â

Undergraduate students aged 18-25 from colleges in Mumbai will work in teams to design women-friendly city plans. Participating colleges will be invited to form teams of minimum two people and maximum four people–at least one member from each team must be female. The teams from each college will then attend the kick-off of the Youth Design Innovation Challenge on July 22nd. The compulsory inclusion of women in each team ensures that the person who the plan is meant for will have a direct hand in its creation–an opportunity rarely given to women even when it comes to governing laws. “We are exploring these challenges as a diverse group so that we create awareness and facilitate a greater understanding about the issues that face us,” D’Silva says. “Hopefully together we can co-create and collaborate for the city we need.” [...]

Beccaynr (talk) 21:34, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Please read the actual link at Aspen, as it includes a brief CV. Being invited to speak at the Aspen Institute's Ideas Festival is a pretty big deal in and of itself, an indication that both the Aspen Institute and The Atlantic, itself a highly reliable source, believe that the subject is notable. But let's go further and look at what the brief CV says
"ElsaMarie D’Silva is founder and CEO of the Red Dot Foundation (Safecity), a platform that crowdsources personal experiences of sexual violence and abuse in public spaces. She’s a Yale World Fellow and alumna of the Stanford Draper Hills Summer Fellows Program, US State Department’s Fortune Program, Oxford Chevening Gurukul, and Commonwealth Leadership Program. D’Silva is a fellow with Rotary Peace, Aspen New Voices, Vital Voices, and a BMW Foundation Responsible Leader. Previously, she worked for Jet Airways and Kingfisher Airlines, most recently as vice president of network planning and charters. A writer, public speaker, and panelist, D’Silva is one of BBC Hindi’s 100 Women and received the Vital Voices Global Leadership Award."
Is it still your contention that this individual is non-notable? That none of these organizations recognition of her, on their own or as a whole, taken together, indicates any level of notability? Really? What would you consider acceptable demonstration of notability? Hyperion35 (talk) 12:57, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Please read WP:BASIC and WP:GNG to understand how notability is assessed on Wikipedia. This is critical for someone participating in AFDs. As you seem to be hung up on the term "CV", do also read WP:NOTCV. If you have any additional questions on Wikipedia's guidelines, post them at WP:HELPDESK. M4DU7 (talk) 18:12, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I am aware of those guidelines. Perhaps I was unclear in my previous comment. Notability is dependent upon reliable independent sources that provide coverage of the subject. My point regarding the CV was merely to show that the subject has worked with multiple different high profile groups, she has participated in multiple high profile events, and received multiple awards. These are all things that are likely to generate coverage. It would be exceedingly unlikely that such a person would not have received significant coverage in reliable sources. The article was certainly poorly sourced and cited, on this I agree with you. I am pointing out that just from what has been reported from one reliable source about the subject points us towards more likely points of coverage. That is one of the issues up for consideration in any AfD: given what we can verfy about the subject so far, are we likely to be able to obtain sufficient RS to demonstrate notability and build out the article. For example, there is almost always news coverage of speakers at the Aspen Ideas Festival, the BBC would hardly name 100 Hindi Women without providing some coverage of each one, and I'd be willing to bet that there must be coverage for that Vital Voices Global Leadership award as well. People are pointing you towards places where we can likely find RS and coverage to determine notability, and it is likely that we will find it there. The reasons for pointing it out first is because it may take more than a few days to track down, which is why notability guidelines discuss all sorts of "tests" for determining how likely it is that we will find such guidelines. Now, before I go looking for those sources, I am curious as to what you would consider sufficient. Hyperion35 (talk) 19:46, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You say that it is likely that there exist sources that provide independent and significant coverage of this individual, without actually providing one. That is not a persuasive argument. Interviews and sources quoting her are all we have at the moment. Our GNG bar is far higher than this. M4DU7 (talk) 08:21, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Additional Sources I am puzzled by the statement at the beginning of this article that the editor was unable to find verifiable information from reliable sources. A quick Google search turns up quite a bit, even before digging into the various awards and events and such.
Here award from Vital Voices is summarized here: https://www.vitalvoices.org/people/elsamarie-dsilva/ and we can see the photos of the award being given out by a highly notable former US Secretary of State here: https://vitalvoices.exposure.co/2017-global-leadership-awards and more information about the award itself is here: https://www.vitalvoices.org/what-we-do/individualized-investments/honoree-program-2/
The International Womens Forum gives a summary about d'Silva here https://www.iwforum.org/elsamarie_dsilva although it is similar to the info from Aspen, still it is good to get confirmation. It appears that she may have given a lecture or class at the IWF.
The National Endowment for Democracy also lists some info for her here, and indicates that she is a fellow there as well: https://www.ned.org/fellows/elsa-marie-dsilva/
A website called TheFemWord has an interview with d'Silva here: https://www.thefemword.world/her-story/elsa-dsilva-founder-safecity I do not know much about the website, but the interview appears to be rather in-depth, discussing not only her Safe City project, but her earlier career and future plans. An interview is obviously primary rather than secondary, so may not establish notability but is very useful for information about the subject (we have so many other secondary sources for notability, but they often don't contain this depth of information, if you see my point).
I find that she has also published several essays in multiple publications such as Yale Daily News, Bitch Media, Huffington Post, Global Diplomacy Lab, NPR, and other places.
https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2018/11/27/dsilva-ending-sexual-violence/
https://www.bitchmedia.org/article/all-too-often-films-stalking-seen-romantic
https://global-diplomacy-lab.org/blog/domestic-violence-how-women-struggle-during-covid-19-lockdowns/
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/enabling-safe-urban-space-for-women-in-india_b_7797034
I can continue this search if M4DU7 still has objections. But what I see are multiple think tanks that have her profile listed as a member/fellow, interviews that have useful info for the article, major international awards (Hillary Clinton does not give out participation trophies), and I count maybe 20 articles/essays/OpEds published in major independent national and international publications. This has to meet GNG by any sane standard. If it still does not, I feel like this is still enough to point towards more RS, since there is still plenty out there. Hyperion35 (talk) 20:30, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
More interviews, blogs, primary sources, self-authored columns... And the good old WP:LOTSOFSOURCES argument coupled with "Oh, she received X award at an event which was attended by famous personality Y. She's gotta be notable as she has a photo with Z.". M4DU7 (talk) 08:45, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As I said, I included the interview as an example of a source for more information about the subject for the article, which may help improve the article. Next, self-authored is NOT the same as self-published. The latter is what we want to avoid. Self-authored articles published in reliable sources are actually fairly useful and help establish that these reliable sources believe that the subject is a notable individual. As for your last part, I cannot tell whether you are simply trying to be snarky, or whether you are not comprehending what I wrote. D'Silva received a prestigious award. The award was presented by a highly notable, famous, widely-known individual, which goes to the argment about the award's prestige. Receiving a prestigious award is itself a primary criterion for notability! See WP:ANYBIO She was not just "photographed with" Hillary Clinton, but rather the organization that gave the award asked and got Hillary Clinton to present the award. The issue here isn't just one award, or just one (out of 20) self-authored articles published in reliable sources, or interviews, or multiple fellowships and speaking engagements at prestigious institutions, but rather that when we take all of these things together, it becomes extremely difficult to argue that the subject is non-notable, to the point that it almost sounds ridiculous. But what exactly would change your mind, aside from all those publications, an award handed to her by one of the most famous women in the world, and the opinions of all of those think tanks and institutions? Hyperion35 (talk) 21:28, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Fails WP:SIGCOV. What's interesting here, is there is enough coverage to establish notability for Safecity, the organization/ app created by Ms D'Silva. We currently lack an article on the company/ app, and those interested in editing in this area should consider writing an article on that topic with the sources presented here. However, notability is not inherited, and Ms. D'Silva is not the main subject of these references.4meter4 (talk) 02:03, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment In addition to the sources listed in this discussion where D'Silva is the main topic, as well as the sources that document the possibility that other sources WP:NEXIST, WP:GNG states, Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material, so there appears to be sufficient support for D'Silva's WP:BASIC notability. Beccaynr (talk) 02:17, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I disagree that there is significant coverage in the references beyond mere trivial mention of D’Silva. You are overstating what is there.4meter4 (talk) 03:22, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There is independent and reliable coverage above that focuses on D'Silva, even just by a review of the headlines, and coverage that includes D'Silva's biographical information, as well as why she started SafeCity, all of which is more than trivial, and given the significant amount of coverage about D'Silva creating Safecity and its impact, she also appears to have WP:CREATIVE notability, because she "is known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique." Beccaynr (talk) 03:31, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Again, the coverage is trivial on her but not her app. Fails WP:SIGCOV. No matter how much you argue back and forth there is a basic sourcing issue here when it comes to establishing notability.4meter4 (talk) 12:00, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I disagree about the sourcing, and per WP:IAR, I think it would improve Wikipedia to have this article, and I think the spirit and intent of the guidelines support this - D'Silva has accomplished more than SafeCity, and this has also been found worthy of notice by independent and reliable sources. Per WP:NPROF (an alternative to the general notability guideline), criteria 7, she also "is frequently quoted in conventional media as an academic expert in a particular area," including the improvement of safety in cities, and not just in relation to SafeCity. Beccaynr (talk) 12:53, 24 March 2021 (UTC) Also per WP:NPROF criteria 6, D'Silva is the "director of a highly regarded, notable academic independent research institute or center (which is not a part of a university)" (SafeCity). Beccaynr (talk) 14:33, 24 March 2021 (UTC) See e.g. Implementing the NUA - Can we use Big Data to Create Safer Public Places for Girls and Women? (Global Policy Journal, 2018), SafeCity: Understanding Diverse Forms of Sexual Harassment Personal Stories (EMNLP 2018), Women’s victimisation and safety in transit environments (Crime Prevention and Community Safety, Vol 19, pages 163–167 (2017)), Women’s strategies addressing sexual harassment and assault on public buses: an analysis of crowdsourced data (Crime Prevention and Community Safety, Vol 19(3)). Beccaynr (talk) 16:16, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Just to add to Beccaynr's point, D'Silva is also a fellow at several think tanks and as such has given speeches and written articles on the general subjects of sexual harassment, sexual assault and violence, etc. So it's not just this one program that she founded, but also these other independent groups that she has been working with, in her own right, including the Aspen Institute and National Endowment for Democracy, where her expertise is welcomed in the context of tackling broad policy topics. This is a good reason to have an article about D'Silva, in addition to whether or not we have an article about SafeCity. Hyperion35 (talk) 18:25, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Beccaynr (talk) 13:29, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I had included the secondary source coverage from that source but another editor removed it from my comment - the article does include an interview, but it also begins with a two-paragraph introduction from the publication, which concludes with "Here’s what she has to say about Safecity and her journey so far." The article is not written by D'Silva, the disclaimer does not state that, and I included the relevant excerpt from the article in my original comment to try to make the secondary source portion clear. Beccaynr (talk) 02:49, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I mean basically the entire article, except possibly the first two paragraphs (of which has three sentences about her), were written by D'Silva. The article itself is from TomorrowMakers from "Transamerica Direct Marketing Consultants Private Limited" (in partnership with The Economic Times) and was not written by The Economic Times. It's more of a press release than an independent reliable source. — MarkH21talk 02:59, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment That is a more than fair critique, and thank you for pointing it out. Beccaynr (talk) 03:21, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It would be rather difficult to refbomb a non-notable subject, I would think. The "Three" essay is not a binding policy, and appears to directly contradict multiple existing guidelines, but I'll humor you. WP:ANYBIO says that receiving a prestigious award alone is sufficient to establish notability:
    1. [1], 2017 Vital Voices Light of Freedom Award
    Elsa D'Silva was also invited to speak at the Aspen Ideas Festival, which a joint production of The Aspen Institute and The Atlantic. In addition to speaking at the festival itself, The Aspen Institute provides a list of her fellowships, awards, and accomplishments that could easily serve as the article lede,
    1. [2]
    Elsa D'Silva was also a fellow with the National Endowment for Democracy. According to NED, during her fellowship she wrote a handbook (presumably published by NED) on the power of digital technology to address gender based violence. It would be good to track down this handbook, even if it is a primary source, but here is NED acting as a secondary source attesting to her importance,
    1. [3]
    I have chosen these three sources because all three involve other people attesting to her notability, and the second two specifically because they point towards inevitably more coverage in reliable sources that ought to be out there. This is not a WP:LOTSOFSOURCES argument, but rather a situation where these sources establish notability and point towards further places to look. I believe that any editor who checks these three sources will come away convinced that this person is notable and that SIGCOV exists. Hyperion35 (talk) 15:44, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep There is enough independent reliable coverage, both focusing on her and mentioning her non-trivially. I feel that she makes it over the bar for WP:GNG. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:30, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Major sourcing issues in article. The following sources are too closely related to the subject (see urls in article):
1. ThemeXpose. "Making cities safer". www.redelephantfoundation.org. Retrieved 26 November 2016. (written by subject of article)
2. "Spotlight: Elsa Marie D'Silva, Founder and CEO of The Red Dot Foundation, India". National Endowment For Democracy. 13 December 2019. Retrieved 15 March 2021. (D'Silva is a Fellow of the National Endowment For Democracy; and therefore this source is too closely connected to her)
3. Fellows of the Week: VVLead Fellowship Weekly Roundup". TinyLetter. Retrieved 26 November 2016. (D'Silva is a Vital Voices Fellow and therefore this source is too closely related to the subject)
4. "Safecity by ElsaMarie D'Silva maps sexual violence". SheThePeople TV. Retrieved 26 November 2016. (Essentially written by D'Silva, all content not written by her is easily found in better independent sources already in the article)
5. D'Silva, Elsa. "Elsa D'Silva: Crowdsourcing the End of Sexual Violence". Aspen Ideas Festival. WETA. Retrieved 16 March 2021 (written by the subject of the article)
6. D'Silva, Elsa. "Aspen Ideas Festival". (written by the subject)
7. Dasra (2015). "Safecity" (PDF). Dasra. Archived from the original (PDF) on 26 November 2016. Retrieved 26 November 2016. (written by the subject)
8. D'Silva, Elsa (27 November 2018). "D'SILVA: Ending sexual violence". Yale News. Retrieved 15 March 2021. (written by the subject)
9. "Q&A with ElsaMarie D'Silva". Maurice R. Greenberg World Fellows Program. Yale University. May 2020. Retrieved 15 March 2021. (direct interview with subject)

The rest of the sources are more about her company, Red Dot, or her company's app Safecity. Best.4meter4 (talk) 04:01, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment The article is currently being reworked, even though Deletion is not cleanup. A discussion is also happening about the sources and the policies and guidelines related to article content on the article's Talk page. Beccaynr (talk) 04:54, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I am rather astounded at the suggestion that because someone is a fellow at a think tank, we cannot use that think tank as a source, because it is too close(?). Are you, perhaps, unaware of how these organizations function, or unfamiliar with them? I do understand that they are more common in American public policy, but most of these organizations have counterparts (and often offices) in other countries. However, as noted, this is probably better left as a discussion for the article talk page. Hyperion35 (talk) 12:14, 25 March 2021 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Elsa_D%27Silva&oldid=1248783038"