Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Parker Molloy

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Parker Molloy

[edit]

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

Parker Molloy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject fails WP:BIO notability, most of the sources aren't independent of the subject. TheLoyalOrder (talk) 02:06, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheLoyalOrder I'm counting 28 sources in that AFD, and its difficult to know what sources you are talking about specifically because they are not numbered. I suggest doing a WP:SIRS table source analysis here for clarity. You might also want to include the sources currently cited in the article as well. Best.4meter4 (talk) 03:40, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
sure, i'll do that soon. thanks TheLoyalOrder (talk) 05:27, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
From Source Significant? Independent? Reliable? Secondary? Pass/Fail Notes
Currently used in article https://windycitytimes.com/2014/06/25/windy-city-times-30-under-30-to-be-honored-june-26/ No presumably presumably No X Mentioned in a list of a bunch of people by this local newspaper
https://www.advocate.com/politics/transgender/2014/03/31/2014-trans-100-includes-cece-mcdonald-fallon-fox#toggle-gdpr No No presumably No X Mentioned once, seemingly because she writes for them
https://web.archive.org/web/20190203133449/https://www.mediamatters.org/authors/parker-molloy/382 No No presumably No X an article she wrote, not about her
https://newrepublic.com/authors/parker-molloy No No No X its just a link to their author page
https://www.salon.com/writer/parker_marie_molloy/ No No No X ditto
https://thought.is/what-its-like-to-come-out-as-transgender-at-work/ Yes No ? No X article about herself
https://web.archive.org/web/20141104114234/http://parkthatcar.net/2012/07/16/oneoftherottenones/ No No ? No X blog post by her
Parker Marie Molloy (February 25, 2014). My Transgender Coming Out Story. Thought Catalog. ISBN 9781629210605. ? No ? No X dead link to ebook she wrote
https://web.archive.org/web/20150312125430/http://chicagoist.com/2014/03/02/interview_parker_marie_malloy_on_ca.php Yes No presumably No X interview of her
https://www.salon.com/2014/02/05/piers_morgan_grills_trans_activist.../ No Yes debatable Yes X just quotes a tweet of hers
https://web.archive.org/web/20201206162642/http://archive.azcentral.com/community/gilbert/articles/20140124gilbert-golf-inventor-suicide-website-essay-anne-vanderbilt.html No Yes ? No X she's not mentioned
https://grantland.com/features/a-mysterious-physicist-golf-club-dr-v/ No Yes ? No X ditto
https://web.archive.org/web/20170914124936/https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/3-signs-we-have-a-long-way-to-go-on-trans-rights-20150113 No No no No X an article she wrote, not about her
https://www.huffpost.com/voices/topic/transgender No debatable X its just the topic page for all trans articles
https://www.salon.com/2013/08/23/the_happy_story_of_my_transgender_coming_out/ Yes No debatable No X article about herself
https://apnews.com/article/trump-media-election-rallies-facts-kamala-harris-e906e990b5dcfe44b5e672336fe82b32 No Yes Yes Yes X leads with briefly mentioning her perspective on sanewashing of trump and then talks about other people
https://archive.ph/20141108192631/http://nlgja.org/2014/transgender-journalists-and No No ? No X just lists her a particpating in a talk
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/style-blog/wp/2013/08/22/trans-activists-scrutinize-pvt-manning-coverage/ No Yes Yes Yes X just quotes a tweet of hers
https://web.archive.org/web/20141108220813/http://theweek.com/article/index/250110 No No ? No X quotes her amongst other trans people
https://www.bostonglobe.com/lifestyle/2014/12/31/transgender-teen-leelah-alcorn-death-needs-mean-something/4hw6uPd8NtjIbn8kAdyAbM/story.html No No presumably No X her commenting on something, not about her
https://www.autostraddle.com/let-it-go-for-the-last-time-trans-women-were-not-born-boys-255055/ No Yes ? Yes X briefly quoting an op-ed she co wrote, amongst other trans people
http://www.thetrans100.com/about/ No presumably No X just a link to the trans 100 org, she's not mentioned
https://web.archive.org/web/20150213020921/http://www.nwpc.org/2014emmanominees No presumably ? No X list of people who received an honor from an org
https://web.archive.org/web/20141108212634/http://www.lapressclub.org/Resources/Documents/Finalists_NAEJ_2014.pdf No presumably ? No X ditto
https://www.advocate.com/politics/transgender/2014/04/17/t-word-new-n-word No No presumably No X an article she wrote, not about her
https://www.advocate.com/politics/transgender/2014/03/18/rupaul-stokes-anger-use-transphobic-slur No No presumably No X ditto
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/parker-marie-molloy/gay-dudes-can-you-just-not_b_4330353.html No No no No X ditto
https://web.archive.org/web/20141108213125/http://www.pqmonthly.com/parker-marie-molloy-elaborates-gay-dudes-can-just/17814 Yes No ? No X interview of her
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/parker-marie-molloy_b_5077322 not really Yes no Yes X not really about her, author mostly talks about their own experience in response to parker
https://www.advocate.com/commentary/2014/04/17/op-ed-burning-books-one-word-time No Yes ? No X doesn't mention parker
https://www.thestranger.com/seattle/about-the-word-tranny/Content?oid=19946137 No Yes ? No X ditto
https://boingboing.net/2014/04/04/rupaul.html Maybe Yes probably not Yes X perennial soucres describes boingboing.net as a group blog
https://web.archive.org/web/20160311044304/http://www.huffingtonpost.com/our-lady-j/rupauls-drag-race_b_5148719.html No Yes debatable Yes X doesn't mention parker
http://www.wtfpod.com/podcast/episodes/episode_498_-_rupaul_charles ? Yes No ? X ru paul podcast episode, presumably paul talks about his opinion
https://web.archive.org/web/20160819021941/http://roygbiv.jezebel.com/huffpostgays-offensive-video-of-drag-queen-shooting-tra-1566525131 No Yes No Yes X short blog post it looks like
https://www.advocate.com/politics/transgender/2014/04/14/rupauls-drag-race-logo-tv-apologize-transphobic-slur No No presumably Yes X an article she wrote, not about her
https://web.archive.org/web/20141029221559/http://www.glaad.org/blog/update-female-or-she-male-sketch-and-rupauls-drag-race No Yes presumably Yes X doesn't mention her
http://freethoughtblogs.com/zinniajones/2014/04/open-letter-100-trans-women-stand-against-calpernia-addams-and-andrea-james/ not really ? No No X a petition defending her
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/calpernia-addams-andrea-james_b_5146415 not really ? No No X ditto
https://www.queerty.com/trans-violence-watchdogs-issue-advisory-warning-against-advocate-writer-and-trans-activist-parker-molloy-20140903 not really Yes ? Yes X mentions a previous article about parker and then that were added to a list, that's all
https://www.queerty.com/park-that-attitude-the-danger-of-trans-activist-parker-molloy-20140827 probably Yes ? Yes ? unclear on the reliability of Queerty. also not sure if its coverage of her is signifcant
from prev AFD https://www.advocate.com/politics/transgender/2014/05/06/alaska-thunderfuck-apologizes-controversial-video not really No ? No X reads like an ad for a podcast she was on
https://www.thestranger.com/blogs/2014/10/30/20923525/sl-letter-of-the-day-drag-trans-trans-drag not really No ? No X article isn't about her, author just asked her opinion on something
links to a bunch of websites that she writes articles for No No X these aren't sources
https://web.archive.org/web/20210623155424/https://www.glaad.org/blog/author-transphobia-perfectly-natural-asked-take-leave-ad-agency not really Yes Yes Yes ? short article about Gavin McInnes that quotes a tweet of her's
https://windycitytimes.com/2014/05/14/chicagoan-writes-nationally-from-the-t-perspective/ Yes ? ? no? X its mostly an interview, which would be primary source

TheLoyalOrder (talk) 07:06, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

probably wrong on some of these judgements but not wrong to the point it changes the determinations, i think. 0 definitely good sources. Also most of these, regardless of quality, talk about like 1 controversy from a decade ago TheLoyalOrder (talk) 07:09, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I'm confused and impressed that someone would make a gigantic chart to evaluate these sources. Yes, many of them are bad or irrelevant, but so what? There are a lot of subjective judgements of individual sources that I do not share and I believe that Carrite's sources provided in the previous AFD establish notability. Gamaliel (talk) 15:18, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Carrite lists three sources: source 1 isn't independent and is primary (it's mostly an interview of her, the information is coming from the subject), source 2 is from a deprecated source WP:HUFFPOCON (basically a blog post, no editorial oversight), source 3 i'd argue its not really significant coverage of parker, more of one incident involving Parker. Unclear if this site has an editorial (no about us section) or if this is just basically a blog post.
    Even included that, that's one iffy source.
    Also note these three sources are from 2014, not really sustained coverage. TheLoyalOrder (talk) 21:21, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Weak Keep. We need to judge this by the best sources. The inclusion of additional primary sources is neither hear nor there when it comes to deletion. (Any truly superfluous ones can be removed from the article.) I think we can safely disregard the big table of sources above as it lists several secondary sources as not being so. For example, interviews are not primary sources (unless the subject is self-publishing the interview, I guess). I'm sure that this is a genuine misunderstanding but it reveals the entire AfD to be misconceived. --DanielRigal (talk) 16:04, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Update: If it is true that Malloy genuinely requests deletion then I do not oppose deletion on that basis. She is clearly notable enough for us to have an article but not so significantly notable that we must have an article about her, i.e. where not having an article would create a hole in the encyclopaedia. This is a middle position where discretion might be exercised legitimately. I am neutral on that, provided that there really is an unambiguous request for deletion. I guess that makes my !vote into a weak keep overall so I've updated it accordingly. If deleted then the article title should probably redirect to The Advocate. --DanielRigal (talk) 00:46, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    what are the best sources? interviews being primary sources is based on WP:Interviews, since any information they give about themselves is primary and that's what the article is about TheLoyalOrder (talk) 20:38, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Weak Keep. Sufficient coverage in reliable sources (I just added one). Funcrunch (talk) 18:02, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Updating my !vote as I just saw on the article talk page that the subject wants this page removed. Funcrunch (talk)
  • Delete: I do not believe Carritte's sources establish notability. The HuffPost source is unusable per WP:HUFFPOCON. I don't think the Windy City source is sufficiently independent, but even if it was that only leaves us with two usable sources between it and Queerty. The sources currently in the article seem to be a mixture of passing mentions or Molloy herself. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 19:17, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Comment. I've just searched for her name on google scholar and seen that she's frequently mentioned as an example of someone who has said or written something. She must be widely known. --Northernhenge (talk) 23:46, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Updated now that I've noticed what the subject herself says and looked at the article in that light. Essentially it's at risk of violating WP:NPOV throughout, in its present form. ("...representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources".) I know that doesn't have an impact on notability but it's a good reason to delete, without ruling out someone completely rewriting it in the future. --Northernhenge (talk) 15:08, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, she's borderline notable, however it's not a clear case as much of this is what she said/wrote, not independent coverage. Together with subject requesting deletion, I think we err on the side of their request as a BLP. Star Mississippi 02:56, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 09:23, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 12:23, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Parker_Molloy&oldid=1261687334"