Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cooper Giloth

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. No arguments for delete have been set forth since the article has been moved and improvements have been made. By all appearances GNG has been met and the subject has been shown to be notable within the field. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 14:54, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cooper Giloth

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

Searches turned up not a single in-depth source regarding this individual. Books turned up a few trivial mentions, but nothing which would meet WP:GNG, certainly doesn't meet WP:NACADEMIC nor WP:NARTIST. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:50, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:50, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

~~Speedy Userfy or Draftify~~ Keep (per below) as this is a new user who struggled to put the article into userspace (first moving to Wikipedia: space). The subject of the article has a strong shot at notability, as she was very active in the 80's (pre-internet of course) [1]. The article still needs work, despite The Mighty Glen's effort to clean it up. The COPYVIO flag for the list of articles seems incorrect, and easy enough to fix: are copyrightable lists as such even copyrightable? For example: recipes are not. I put a Speedy on there, because I think the quality of the article is too rough to have on wiki in its current state, and the new editor should have the opportunity to learn how to make it correct. Theredproject (talk) 13:17, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy userfy or draftify per User:Theredproject. I've seen lists of artists exhibitions deleted as copyvio breaches of fair use before, but I don't really know copyright law in sufficient detail. So I'll simply leave that last copypaste tag in place, and let an editor who does know to make a decision. The Mighty Glen (talk) 13:25, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Seems I missed the fact that the article title is a typo. The artist's real name is Copper Giloth, not Cooper. Agree with the draftify/userfy above. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:25, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi all - I'm not going to argue for or against deletion since I watched over this class under my work account, Shalor (Wiki Ed). Looking at the page, it looks like the works section is actually a list of news articles that were written about Giloth as opposed to things she created. I'll try and do some cleanup as the class has ended and I'm not sure that the student would return to edit the article. Give me the evening to see if I can fix this? ReaderofthePack (｡◕‿◕｡) 22:40, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I think I've added enough to establish notability. Part of the issue here is that Giloth was more active prior to the widespread use of the Internet, as most newspapers don't really upload their articles pre-2000. I've found some mention of her in various books, where she's credited as being a pioneer within her field, and she's also been featured in some exhibitions at major museums such as MoMA, which would be enough to establish notability. As far as the copyvio goes, there's no real way to re-write citations or even a list of works in general, so I would say that this is safe from speedy deletion as copyvio unless there's some other copyvio visible elsewhere. I won't remove the tag since I do have a COI here with the student, but I will say that this isn't the type of things that would be considered a copyright violation. ReaderofthePack (｡◕‿◕｡) 23:21, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:50, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:07, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:07, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the list of coverage for the time being and moved it to the article's talk page so they can be verified. ReaderofthePack (｡◕‿◕｡) 13:27, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've also fixed the title since it was bugging me. ReaderofthePack (｡◕‿◕｡) 13:28, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've switched my vote to keep based on this solid work by ReaderofthePack. Theredproject (talk) 02:12, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Why are there two articles now, one at Cooper Giloth and one at Copper Giloth? I see that Talk:Cooper Giloth redirects to Talk:Copper Giloth, as it should. Was the article redirect suppressed because of this AfD? (Otherwise, I would have changed it myself.) NotARabbit (talk) 03:05, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- ReaderofthePack moved the article to the correct title but then copy-pasted all the old content back to the old title. Regardless of outcome we should probably get rid of the incorrect title once the AfD closes. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:31, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry - that was my mistake. I think I had an old version of the page up and ended up editing that instead. It's since been fixed. ReaderofthePack (｡◕‿◕｡) 15:23, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep GNG is met by the many book mentions that are non-trivial.104.163.159.237 (talk) 03:22, 8 May 2018 (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.