Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Laia Martínez i López

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. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) –CaroleHenson (talk) 19:21, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Laia Martínez i López

[edit]
Laia Martínez i López (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)

Not sufficient sources to establish WP:GNG per news and nothing at Google custom search –CaroleHenson (talk) 17:13, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:23, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:23, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:23, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:23, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. These are the. most. incredibly. poor. reasons to nominate for deletion; akin to saying "I'm really not much good at searching for Catalan sources using google, so we might as leap straight to an unfounded conclusion and delete this piece of work". A simple google search brings back lots of hits. I don't read Catalan nor Spanish, but the URLs & general tone of what I'm seeing suggests she passes GNG in spades. I'm sorry, but really, this nomination is nonsense on stilts. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:06, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Tagishsimon, taking the quotes off the search and searching the entire internet vs. focusing on news, books, other secondary sources isn't necessarily meaningful. For instance, when I search my name without quotes I get many more times the hits than this subject. It would be helpful to state the reasons why she "passes GNG in spades" with specifics.–CaroleHenson (talk) 02:16, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
CaroleHenson, a question: do you speak Spanish/Catalan?198.58.162.200 (talk) 02:22, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
CaroleHenson, the "Google Custom search " URL above, aka using a boolean to search in Google, is defective. When i click your link, zero results. When I paste the same boolean phrase into my own browser search, I get zoodles of hits. I think this may be the cause of this AFD and the other two AfDs that you withdrew today. 198.58.162.200 (talk) 02:36, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I did not withdraw the other nomination because of search results differences. For many articles that I've reviewed today I have found lots of cse, news, HIghBeam, newspaper, JSTOR, scholar, etc. hits... and yes I agree that it's a subset of what's found from a general internet search from the first link. So far, I don't see anything in the comments here - or in the article that causes me to think I should withdraw this nomination, so let's ride it out a bit more. If someone wanted to expand the article with content that proves her notability - or explains how her notability is met, that would be great and helpful!–CaroleHenson (talk) 02:47, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
CaroleHenson, I'm tryoing to pooint out to you that the Google Custom search link you provide in the nomination is invalid for the purposes of Afd. Google Custom search is not for general web searches, it's for searching a single domain like example.com. If you put the same terms you used into plain old Google, you get voluminous hits.198.58.162.200 (talk) 05:15, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't misunderstand you. "Plain old Google" brings a lot of non-reliable sources. As I said earlier, if I search on my name in plain old Google, I get more hits than on her name, but that doesn't mean I should have a Wikipedia article. Here are the search hits using English, català, español:
- If we're only going by search hits, is this enough to be "significant coverage" under WP:GNG? If the result of the discussion is to keep, that is perfectly fine with me.
- Regarding Google custom search, "Anna Aguilar-Amat" gets 120 hits on Google custom search (which cleans out a lot of unreliable sources and sounds like a good number to me.–CaroleHenson (talk) 13:46, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Carole, I'm wondering why you're expecting to find hits on a Catalan musician and writer on things like JSTOR? Of course a scholar like Anna Aguilar-Amat is going to be covered more thoroughly in certain sources, just look at what they're actually notable for. For musicians especially you should be looking at the relevant areas of WP:NMUSIC, not running your own personal criteria of having hits on your specific custom search on a language you apparently don't speak. KaisaL (talk) 20:48, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I was replying to a comment, perhaps a mistake.
It would be so refreshing and helpful if someone would address in what ways she's notable.–CaroleHenson (talk) 20:56, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That's fair enough, it's just an observation that your own criteria and search system is perhaps more relevant in certain areas than others. Entertainment isn't covered so thoroughly in books and scholarly sources. KaisaL (talk) 23:11, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi everyone, I am participating in a and one of the proposals to create an article is this,Laia Martínez i López. I know the article it´s short but I improved the references. I think the article It´s relevant because this person it´s know in Spain and other counties of the EE UU, and it´s important make known the figure of women in literature. Hope you understand Santamarcanda (talk) 01:33, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome! Personally I agree.198.58.162.200 (talk) 02:11, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • She is one of the poets used by the Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (Open University of Catalonia) to promote the Day of the Catalan poetry. You can check it here and here ―this is a fragment of the previous document to check only Laia biography―.
  • She also has wrote in the journal Caràcters, La dificultat de donar les gràcies, but I don't find the article in open access.
  • In the bibliographic portal of the National Library of Spain you can check its item. She has work in several works and she has four books.
I know that it's very complicated to understand that this women has notability because she is a poet present in the Catalan poetry scene. That it's shown with the news, because she is active in different festivals and works. I understand that maybe it's very soon to publish something about her, but I think that her page in Wikipedia is important because it reflect the Catalan poetry scene. I am going to search more about her to improve its article. Regards, Ivanhercaz (Talk) 19:05, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent, thanks Ivanhercaz!–CaroleHenson (talk) 19:20, 26 March 2017 (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/Laia_Martínez_i_López&oldid=1083685402"