Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amy S. Foster

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Keep. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 18:03, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Amy S. Foster

[edit]
Amy S. Foster (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:BLP of a songwriter and novelist which makes a potentially legitimate claim of notability, but fails to cite even one reliable source to support it. And I'm not finding the necessary volume of media coverage in a Google search to qualify her for an article, either — literally all I can find is two articles about other people (specifically her parents) which glancingly namecheck her existence, but fail to be about her. No claim of notability, especially in a BLP, confers any entitlement to have a Wikipedia article if they aren't the subject of enough reliable source coverage to support it. Delete, without prejudice against recreation in the future if real sourcing ever actually starts to happen. Bearcat (talk) 21:10, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:34, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:34, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:34, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
She's also known as Amy Foster-Gillies[4][5][6] (this name is used in our article on her father David Foster). Colapeninsula (talk) 13:12, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
  • probable keep I acknowledge that the article as it now stands is paltry. However, she has been short-listed for multiple Juno Awards, possibly won one (google was so dispositive that did not take the time to sort them out) Article I found claims that at least 3 of her songs have topped the charts, her book got favorable attention in general circulation press. The multiple names thing has probably made this difficult; I looked only under Amy S. Foster, I dded a ref section and added 1 RS in-line. Clearly it needs sourcing, but I doubt that it will be hard, despite her very common and multiple names.E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:48, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Err ... notability isn't established by "short-listing" for awards: it's established by winning major ones. It's not established by claims that songs have "topped" the charts: it's established by looking at the relevant Billboard lists (readily available) and demonstrating that they have. If her book has had favorable attention in "general circulation press," where are the cites? We don't keep an article at AfD by speculating that sourcing may exist. We keep it by demonstrating that it does exist, with linked cites. Nha Trang Allons! 18:19, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No, the question at AFD is whether sources exist, not whether they are already on the page. If User:Nha Trang had bothered to look up either name, but especially Amy Foster-Gillies, he would instantly have discovered sources. But Nha Trang makes a habit of commenting on these discussions without looking to see if sources exist. His comment is worthless.18:50, 1 May 2015 (UTC)E.M.Gregory (talk)
Let's look at the "sources" you list below: IMDB, which everyone knows (well, everyone other than you, maybe) is not a source that can be used to support notability; a blogpost, and her father's website. Say what? If those are the kind of crap sources you seriously put forth as your take on what meets WP:IRS, I really don't think you're the bloke I'm coming to for judgments on other editors. Nha Trang Allons! 20:25, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As usual, Nha Trang looks only at sourcing that is already on the page, or that others have already found. Echos do not advance a discussion.E.M.Gregory (talk) 22:39, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Inother, it is always nice to welcome new editors to the task of reviewing AFD. However, since your are new, I want to point out that your thoughts are more useful if, instead of taking a few seconds on each nominated article before iVoting, you took the time to search for sources, read the article and comments, and bring some evidence to support your opinion.E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:56, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Look at WP:CREATIVE: "The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews." Then take a look at the number of blue-linked songs on her page. I believe that the confusion was caused by her use of 2 names. And I realize that the article needs expansion. But the songs confer notability. iVoted probable keep above. Altering that to KeepE.M.Gregory (talk) 20:35, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As suggested by User:Colapeninsula, I have added reviews of "When Autumn Leaves". I think the sourcing is now adequate to pass WP:CREATIVE.E.M.Gregory (talk) 22:36, 13 May 2015 (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/Amy_S._Foster&oldid=1070952848"