Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew Hollander

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 delete. I don't know why this particular AfD has brought the SPAs in droves, but given the repetition of arguments without evidence, the sockpuppetry, and the assumptions of bad faith, I haven't much option besides setting aside the !votes of any suspected SPA. The arguments that remain constitute clear consensus in favor of deletion. The number of SPAs also makes salting justifiable here. Vanamonde (Talk) 05:34, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Hollander

[edit]

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

Andrew Hollander (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)

Andrew Hollander is a composer and songwriter whose puffery-filled article is essentially a list of credits that are better left to IMDB. The only sources cited include a brief mention of Hollander or do not mention him at all.

Hollander has received no significant independent media attention. He was the composer for a notable film Waitress, but there is no indication that his work was notable. He has co-written or produced songs but there is no indication these songs were particularly notable, even if the songs' albums or performers might have had some press. All told, I don't believe anything in the article satisfies WP:ENT ("significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions").

In the past, there has been concern about conflicts of interest in edits to this article, since they were often by single-purpose or promotional accounts. One of the editors created the page of Hollander's wife Dana Parish, which I am also recommending be deleted. A recent dubious editor is AmySEOPro (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log). Another single purpose account Magic4950 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) made numerous edits and inappropriately marked many of them as minor. There were also concerns about copyright violations. There does not seem to be much interest in this article by authentic editors. Given the above, I propose deletion of this article. ScienceFlyer (talk) 19:32, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.bmi.com/news/entry/andrew-hollander-talks-composing-for-words-on-bathroom-walls-with-the-chain https://www.bmi.com/news/entry/bmi_songwriter_andrew_hollander_contributes_to_celine_dions_highly_anticipa https://top40-charts.com/news.php?nid=74371 DubiousPuffery (talk) 00:04, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This song won a Chinese Grammy! “Someday I’ll fly” G.E.M. > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peXpXFYhhyY Here's another G.E.M. > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQ0vRcpsfCM Minecraft Dungeon Lord (talk) 21:43, 31 August 2022 (UTC)— Minecraft Dungeon Lord (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

  • Keep > As many have pointed out, this is clearly a personal attack and the article absolutely meets Wikipedia's requirements. Even the tone of the comments from Oaktree and Science Flyer are personal and emotional in nature. magic4950 (talk) 00:12, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • No quality sources found? The L.A. Times, Variety and the Hollywood Reporter how are these not quality sources to establish notoriety? DubiousPuffery (talk) 00:14, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Quality sources yes, substantial coverage, not quite. Little bits of info that don't help with GNG, as discussed. I'm not attacking anyone, the sources presented aren't useful for our purposes here. Oaktree b (talk) 13:47, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The article is a BIO but without any supporting sources for the biographical information. Of the cites in the article, many don't mention him at all and the rest are name-checks. Of the links given above in this discussion, only one has any substance about him ([1]). He does get name credit for composing and for producing, but not the content that would support the article. If the un-referenced material (and sources that don't mention him) were removed there would definitely not be enough left for an article. TOO SOON? Lamona (talk) 05:30, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Info This is to inform that the nominator Science Flyer is vandalizing page and associating BMI to Hollander by saying Andrew Hollander has a financial relationship with BMI which has proved his nonsense and personal agenda, he is only interested in removing the pages of both husband and wife. The page should be locked. AppleBoosted (talk) 06:32, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Adding to AppleBoosted's vandalism info - ScienceFlyer also removed recent edits citing credible sources that support notoriety, suppressing relevant information counter to their request for article deletion. ScienceFlyer made an unfounded statement about the president of 20th Century Fox having a "conflict of interest" to justify the removal of these citations. DubiousPuffery (talk) 11:52, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete – a few mentions in the press but nothing really useful for biographical purposes. Might be WP:TOOSOON. Madeline (part of me) 12:14, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep after seeing additions on the page and verifying references I guess the notability is met. 2603:8001:9300:9656:7C7E:ED5:68D0:F92C (talk) 22:08, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete classic example of what happens when someone creates a Wikipedia entry for the wrong reasons. If there were enough independent coverage for a 100-word article, then the inclusionist in me would be arguing to keep this. But when yes-people synthesise content from film credits and name checks without any in-depth sources, then the page is a sitting duck for trolls. Worse, it creates the impression that our methodology is flexible or optional when, in reality, our epistemic standards are what holds Wikipedia together. Enough is enough. Let it WP:SNOW2A00:23C7:829E:7E01:5CF0:BE78:A7F7:F872 (talk) 20:57, 3 September 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C7:829E:7E01:5CF0:BE78:A7F7:F872 (talk) 20:54, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Insisting that there isn't enough significant coverage for notability is strange given all the examples submitted at this point in the AfD discussion - it seems to be a technique to get people not to actually bother to read the sources and pretend Hollander is either not mentioned/only mentioned in passing. DubiousPuffery (talk) 23:08, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • We have analyzed them, they aren't terribly useful, as explained. There isn't much left to find. No one is attacking him here, you being the only one that keeps saying it's happening. I don't know the fellow and don't particularly care who he is or what he does. We're reviewing the quality of the sources used to see if they warrant having an article in Wikipedia. We've yet to see any that can help support keeping it. Oaktree b (talk) 03:15, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • Others besides me have pointed out the same. If you aren't familiar with the controversy surrounding the topic of Hollander's spouse's book, then you can be forgiven for not understanding that this nominator is clearly someone who is involved in that ugliness, and Hollander has been caught in the middle. I disagree that the articles linked have not supported notoriety. The Variety article combined with the Hollywood Reporter and L.A. Times constitute substantial coverage, and not just a glancing mention. DubiousPuffery (talk) 17:52, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Yikes, this discussion is a mess with all the single-purpose (and potential sockpuppet) accounts. However, after reviewing the sources listed and doing a search on my own, I'm afraid there just isn't enough coverage for Andrew Hollander (which is a shame considering his fairly notable work). I did find it somewhat ironic that his bio on his website has a disclaimer stating that it was copied from Wikipedia. Why? I Ask (talk) 04:59, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Passes WP:COMPOSER criteria #4 which states “Has written a composition that has won (or in some cases been given a second or other place) in a major music competition not established expressly for newcomers”. Hollander was the composer of Emmy award winning TV show on HBO’s A Child's Garden Of Poetry which make him pass this criterion. In addition to this, his notable work is quite well covered in The Hollywood Reporter and Variety news website. Huberfna (talk) 10:34, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep:ScienceFlyer who has nominated this article for deletion and has made multiple bold edits without consensus, appears to have a COI with the subject of this article and his spouse, Dana_Parish, whose article he has also nominated for deletion. This pattern of marking the articles of a couple for deletion and then editing heavily to try to enforce this suggests a personal vendetta of some kind. Tartletvertex (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 15:52, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Passes WP:GNG as he had been the subject of significant coverage in independent, reliable sources, also added four more sources. well-referenced. Don't agree with nom and seems like targeted attack. Losovefa (talk) 19:04, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep Based on the additional sources combined, there's probably enough to just about meet WP:GNG (I'm less familar with WP:COMPOSER, but that should be considered), however I am concerned about the number of seemingly single-purpose accounts involved and wonder if there has been some WP:CANVASSING going on off-wiki somewhere. This is certainly not a case for WP:SNOW as two editors mentioned. I also find the amount of talk of personal attacks concerning. This is the place to focus on sources, not individuals. Other forums are more appropriate for issues about individual editors. -Kj cheetham (talk) 19:50, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Noting that I've semi protected this AfD as it seems to be the target of some sort of meatpuppetry campaign. firefly ( t · c ) 21:37, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and Protect I bet that, the exact moment this article is finally deleted, its going to be recreated. Other than that, i believe that there is no particular reason to keep this one. Handmeanotherbagofthemchips (talk) 21:48, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is a source assessment table I developed based on sources in the article and this discussion:
Source assessment table:
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?
‘Waitress’ success bittersweet for composer (AP/Hollywood Reporter, 2007) Yes There is some independent content about Hollander's career and upcoming projects in addition to a quote from Hollander in the 6 grafs. Yes ~ Not particularly in-depth coverage ~ Partial
Celine Dion Shows Edge, and Tries Out New Characters, on ‘Loved Me Back to Life’ (Billboard, 2013) No In this source primarily about Celine Dion, the artists talk about themselves. Yes No The five short grafs related to the one song co-written by Hollander are primarily quotes. e.g. from hollander, Dana Parish, Dion, and Parish and Hollander's friend Peter Lloyd, then of Razor & Tie Music Publishing. ✘ No
Bringin’ it Backwards: Interview with Rozzi (American Songwriter, 2021?) Yes Yes No This is the only mention in the announcement of the album: "Mostly recorded in London and New York with a handful of stellar producers, including: George Moore (YEBBA, Clean Bandit), Andrew Hollander (Carly Rae Jespen, Coyle Girelli), Pretty Sister (Betty Who, Jordin Sparks), Michael Dragovic, Eric Leva and Jurek (Matoma, NCT Dream, Blackbear)..." ✘ No
a collaborative process (Variety, 2009) Yes Yes ~ The 5 grafs focused on Hollander are based on an interview with Hollander and someone he worked with. ~ Partial
Listen To The Chainsmokers’ First Score On A Feature Film, “Words on Bathroom Walls” No recycled press release No website TOS No names Hollander without secondary context or commentary ✘ No
BMI Songwriter Andrew Hollander Contributes to Celine Dion’s Highly Anticipated New Album (BMI, 2013) No Hollander is a BMI songwriter Yes ~ mostly quotes from Hollander ✘ No
Steve Conte To Release New Album ‘Bronx Cheer’, New Track Out Now (NYSMusic.com, 2021) ? This looks like a recycled press release ? other content on the site looks like recycled press releases No only mention: "Conte produced the album with Andrew Hollander, who has worked with big names in indie and pop." ✘ No
Serious Moonlight — Film Review (AP/Hollywood Reporter, 2009) Yes Yes No only mention is the credits section; "Music: Andrew Hollander" ✘ No
Academy halts mailings of CDs (LA Times, 2007) Yes Yes No There is a quote from Robert Kraft, president of music at 20th Century Fox about Hollander's score for Waitress. According to the LAT, Kraft "noted that Fox Searchlight has two small films, “Once” and “Waitress”". This is not independent commentary about Hollander, it is WP:PROMO. ✘ No
‘Pig,’ ‘Val,’ ‘Adrienne’ and Other 2021 Streaming Gems (NYT, 2021) Yes Yes No Does not mention Hollander ✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.
  • Based on available sources, I !vote delete due to what seems to be insufficient independent and reliable support for WP:BASIC or other notability. Based on the apparent meatpuppetry campaign that includes comments suggesting promotional content and sources support notability, I also recommend salting this article. Beccaynr (talk) 03:11, 6 September 2022 (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/Andrew_Hollander&oldid=1114281861"