Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Cooper (director)

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. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:56, 8 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

James Cooper (director)[edit]

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

Fails WP:BASIC as the only secondary sources given are blogs and self-published websites. Most sources are WP:PRIMARY listings. Cooper does not appear to meet any of the shortcut criteria of WP:DIRECTOR. McGeddon (talk) 17:32, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as not notable at this time. Kierzek (talk) 18:05, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 18:29, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be high degree subjectivity in your assessments. The secondary sources are not all "blogs," - they are reputable online magazines (Indiewire, the dailygrowl, erasingclouds, various film festivals.) I personally think, and I know my opinion does not count equally because of the inane hierarchy on wikipedia, that this is a hasty and ill-advised proposal conjured up by an overly zealous wikipedian, who has a track history of just deleting articles just for the hell of it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.190.148.26 (talk) 18:45, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

He meets these criteria. "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. The person's work (or works) either (a) has become a significant monument, (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.190.148.26 (talk) 18:48, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making personal attacks on other users. As you are a key contributor to the article I can understand you will be aggravated that your "work" is being nominated for deletion but it will not help your case and can harm it just state why you believe he meets the criteria. For each criteria, state which ref in the article supports this. Simply stating the article meets it, is not an argument. Cowlibob (talk) 21:37, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Certainly doesn't meet WP:DIRECTOR, and most of the other sources are self-published (Daily Growl, erasingclouds). One good source from Pop Matters which is really an album review. I couldn't hunt up any better. That said, article has only just been created, so other sources might be found.Doctorhawkes (talk) 02:23, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·E·C) 04:30, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Do not Delete" - Criterion B ("has been part of a significant exhibition") 150 Best most exciting illustrators by Taschen. Criterion C ("has won significant critical attention") Awards for 206 - a film featuring internationally acclaimed film star, David Oyelowo, which won awards at the International Fashion Film Awards. Criterion C ("has won significant critical attention") Awards for various advertisements from 2014: ICAD Awards - Directing, Web Film (Fionn Regan: Bunkhouse Triptych)2014: Kinsale Shark Awards - Bronze ("Cut the Nonsense - Book about Tables", No Nonsense Insurance, Viral Film) 2014: Kinsal Shark Awards - Nominated - International New Directors Award. Criterion C ("has won significant critical attention") Beautiful as you - written by James Cooper - reached number 40 in the Australian charts. The sheer breath of his work in advertising, film, illustration, and music, and its accompanying recognition by awards juries in all those respective fields makes him of note. I am not quite clear on the distinction between blog and news outlet; there seems to be a fairly blurry line there. I am pretty sure you cannot deny that the sourced material in the article happened - its not like all those blogs were fabricated for the purpose of this wikipedia article. While I understand that IMBD is not a "legitimate" for his credits on Freedom, it is really the only possible source that would confirm his work there - it being one of the only bits of his work that has not been critically acclaimed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.190.148.26 (talk) 17:48, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Criterion B is "has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition"; a 1/150th part of an exhibition does not sound substantial. WP:ANYBIO gives a green light for a subject who has won any "well-known and significant award", but those listed in the article all seem to be redlinks. No source has been provided for the assertion that Cooper co-wrote a top 40 song. WP:BLOGS explains Wikipedia policy on using blogs as sources. --McGeddon (talk) 21:26, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re: No source has been provided for the assertion that Cooper co-wrote a top 40 song --- I have posted a source that confirms this assertion. It also does not say the awards need to be known within wikipedia; the are awards that are significant and well-known within the industries in which he was working. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.190.148.26 (talk) 14:52, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

La Jolla Film Festival is a blue link. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.190.148.26 (talk) 19:41, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Do not Delete - The following sources in the article are not blogs ----- CNN -- The Irish Times, an irish daily broadsheet newspaper -- Screen Directors Guild of Ireland -- Indiewire, a daily news site for the independent film community -- Indaba, an online punlication run by Interactive Africa.
There are a grand total of 25 sources for what is a very brief article, 5 of which are reputable, established news sources, others from festival awards sites, the australian music charts, and some of which are from blogs. Please feel free to review them.
Delete, while the citations show the existence of this director, they do not meet the notability requires as per WP:GNG or WP:DIRECTOR. Of the 24 links (2 point to the same target), the vast majority are either blogs or primary sources, including press releases and bios. Even the CNN link is a pr (the report clearly says "not verified by CNN" at its top), about a non-notable festival. The Urban Film festival citation is about another non-notable festival, and the link doesn't even appear to validate the claim in the article that Cooper's short film was "shortlisted". First, there's not a mention of films being shortlisted; second, in the list of short films I fail to see a film by Cooper. The Irish Times article merely mentions that Cooper entered a film in a contest, hardly notable.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:07, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If you look more carefully, you will see that James Cooper's film, starring David Oleyewo, is listed. If a film is listed that means it has been shortlisted . . . You cannot just enter films into a festivals - depending on the festival rules, they are either selected by jury, or one submits and then is selected for viewing by a jury. A lot of films are rejected. The Urban Film Festival is notable.
Also the wikipedia rules state nothing about the secondary sources being unreliable if they are bios. All the secondary sources have to do is back up the claims in the article - if the claims is James Cooper's film was in a festival and the Irish Times presents a preview of the festival in which James Cooper film is listed, then the source has sufficiently backed up the claim. La Jolla Film Festival is notable - the cnn, apparently 'PR" link, explains its importantance in that particular part of the film industry.

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.