Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephanie Rothenberg

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. Sandstein 11:59, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Stephanie Rothenberg

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

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

Perhaps I am missing something, but I do not see how this meets WP:CREATIVE DGG ( talk ) 22:26, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:44, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:44, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete nomed for CSD G12 because of copyvios. --BonkHindrance (talk) 23:02, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 04:16, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:CSD as a WP:COPYRIGHT violation, per WP:TNT as too difficult to fix, and WP:TOOSOON (even if the fixes were made her career hasn't taken off yet). Bearian (talk) 13:27, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The copyvios are minor and fixable at this point in time; the page reported had three phrases tagged, one is "performance, installation, and networked media" and the other two are titles/names. With regard to notability, her work is mentioned in several books including: Media Art and the Urban Environment Engendering Public Engagement with Urban Ecology by Francis T. Marchese; Art In Odd Places: Sign: Sign By Ed Woodham, Erin Donnelly, Radhika Subramaniam; Thinking Through Digital Media: Transnational Environments and Locative Places By D. Hudson, P. Zimmermann; there are more. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 03:39, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
https://tools.wmflabs.org/copyvios/?lang=en&project=wikipedia&title=Stephanie_Rothenberg gives a very low rating. How serious is this alleged copyvio really? Can it not be address by editing? Vexations (talk) 03:58, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Vexations: It was trivial, and I've fixed it. Anything that is flagged now is either the name of a work, or an institution, or a position. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 04:05, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There is real encyclopedic content worth WP:PRESERVEing.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:15, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep I saw four GBooks sources, and a couple middling quality reviews. I believe there are more as she has collaborated with many other artists, and the GBooks results describe such collaborative works that are not currently included in the article. She was also a visiting scholar at Bowdoin College, if that counts. I added two sources.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 08:53, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I see enough sources. Borgia Venedict (talk) 13:53, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I agree with Mary Mark Ockerbloom, TonyTheTiger, ThatMontrealIP, and Borgia Vendict that there is enough to establish notability. When I checked the copyvio, there was only 5.7% - very low percentage. Netherzone (talk) 19:59, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and fix WP:NOTCLEANUP RS exists. Some editors who came before me have begun cleanup and ThatMontrealIP has added sources. It is best that we WP:PRESERVE. Wm335td (talk) 21:28, 9 March 2020 (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.