Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jill Salvino

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 no consensus‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:37, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Jill Salvino

[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)

PROMO for an individual with no sourcing in RS found. Article is a brief career summary, not much indicating notability. Oaktree b (talk) 00:11, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Oaktree b (talk) 00:11, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The New York Times coverage of the film might be notable, could perhaps redirect there. Oaktree b (talk) 00:12, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Indeed, I agree that NYT coverage is pretty promising Between the Shades. That piece probably counts for GNG for the movie, because there's a lot of background and editorial voice not dependent on the interview. The movie may meet GNG, here's a review on ProQuest, 235 words [1]. If there is consensus for it I could write a stub or start class article for the movie for a redirect. —siro χ o 04:33, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That sounds like a really good idea. Would that save the Jill Salvino Wikipedia page from being deleted? If so I am all for it. Please write the stub or start class article for Between the Shades if this can work. I support this. Ricktheelectric (talk) 16:41, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'll start a draft and we'll see where we get. —siro χ o 01:30, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I have written up Draft:Between the Shades. We have 3 in-depth reviews from reliable sources, two are fully independent, while one discloses the author's prior support for the film. We have the NYT interview that has bits of independent SIGCOV, and another 2 background pieces from a single source (author/publication). I think the film meets WP:GNG and WP:NFILM. I will move it out of draft sometime soon, given the large amount of coverage we have for it.

The question now is whether this film means this article's subject meets WP:DIRECTOR.3. —siro χ o 02:25, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:01, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, after working on the Between the Shades article I'm mostly convinced that this subject meets WP:DIRECTOR.3. —siro χ o 09:07, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} (I will not see your reply if you don't mention me) 00:32, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Between the Shades. There is coverage related to the film in e.g. the NYT Apr. 2019, Los Angeles Blade Jun. 2018, a PFLAG blog announcement quoting the Los Angeles Blade, a review in Film Inquiry July 2017, a review from Video Librarian Apr. 2019, and screening announcements from Newsday 2017, 2018. WP:DIRECTOR#3 includes, 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 primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews; there does not appear to be a collective body of work supported by multiple independent periodical articles or reviews, or indications that Between the Shades is a "significant or well-known work" - for example, the film does not appear to be widely-covered, or subject to scholarly analysis, or to have won awards or other significant critical attention. I did not find more independent, reliable, and secondary coverage to help support WP:BASIC or other notability for Salvino in searches online and at the Wikipedia Library. Beccaynr (talk) 15:58, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:29, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for a final time. Thoughts on the article after Siroxo created Between the Shades?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dusti ^{*Let's talk!*} 01:15, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Siroxo's work essentially. Found some more results online: https://www.chroniclenewspaper.com/home/unitarian-universalist-meeting-house-to-screen-between-the-shades-CX563370, https://www.nywift.org/nywift-member-jill-salvinos-between-the-shades-now-on-itunes/, https://wahealthalliance.org/between-the-shades-director-jill-salvino-talks-with-the-alliance/. The NYTimes article is okay, wish there was more coverage but probably good enough. - Indefensible (talk) 02:13, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The additional sources offered above do not seem to help support having an article about Salvino and an article about the film:
- The Chronicle source is a press release (the byline is the location of the screening) announcing a screening of Between the Shades, not an independent secondary source that can support notability of the film or Salvino.
- The NYWIFT announcement of "NYWIFT member Jill Salvino’s documentary Between the Shades is now available on iTunes" recycles content from The New York Times and quotes Salvino. This is not an independent secondary source that can support notability for the film or Salvino.
- The Washington Health Alliance blog interview with Salvino briefly notes she "travels the country opening hearts and minds" showing Between the Shades (without further detail), and focuses on promoting an upcoming event hosted by the Alliance, featuring the film and a panel discussion. This interview and promotional announcement does not appear to be usable for supporting notability of the film or Salvino.
Based on the independent and reliable coverage I have been able to find, sources seem to cover Salvino in a limited manner and only in the context of Between the Shades, and the coverage about her work and career also does not seem to be WP:SUSTAINED or in-depth in a way that permits us to write a reasonably balanced biography. Beccaynr (talk) 03:47, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not great I agree but likely just barely good enough as I wrote earlier. If Between the Shades is notable enough then I think we should also keep this article for the director responsible. So based on the work by Siroxo on Between the Shades, I think we can justify letting this slip by using the NYTimes and other refs in aggregate. - Indefensible (talk) 04:11, 13 August 2023 (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.