Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kenny Klein

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 keep. (non-admin closure) Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:26, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kenny Klein[edit]

Kenny Klein (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

He fails WP:AUTHOR, WP:BK, WP:NMUSIC, WP:ENTERTAINER, and WP:CREATIVE. He wrote part of the article himself, describing himself twice in the third person as "a noted fiddler." [1] The only problem is that he's not noted. Qworty (talk) 08:27, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 21:59, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 21:59, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 21:59, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Keep Meets WP:MUSIC #5 per Steve below. Original delete rationale: The sources in the article are primary or unreliable. The one potential reliable source, Witchcraft Today, has trivial mentions not in-depth discussion (and I don't believe we are supposed to rely on other encyclopedia's). My search for sources has found little additional that could be used to support a Keep argument. In the end, Klein has done many things, but the sources don't establish him as someone meeting notability by Wikipedia standards. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 20:07, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. As an author of several books on Pagan topics, three via Llewellyn Worldwide, and as a founder of the Blue Star Wicca tradition, and one of the most prolific Bards in the Neo-Pagan Movement, IMO he is notable.Rosencomet (talk) 04:02, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • That's primary sourcing, not the secondary sourcing that's required for notability. Qworty (talk) 06:27, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Kenny Klein currently has four books in print and eight current albums for sale. His work speaks for his notability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BlueStarOwl (talk • contribs) 04:37, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • His books and albums are primary sources, not the secondary sources that are required for notability, as short-handed at WP:42. In other words, anything by him is unusable for notability; there have to be significant, multiple, independent resources about him. Qworty (talk) 06:26, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Klein's musical work has been covered at least several times recently in peer-reviewed academic scholarship. His instrumental work was included as a section of a paper entitled "Romancing The Pagan: Folk Music, Politics, and Ideology in Pagan Intellectual History." This paper was presented at the 2005 Conference on Contemporary Pagan Studies in November 2005 at a session concurrent with the National American Academy of Religion conference in Philadelphia. In addition, just today, another academic paper was delivered at the national 2012 American Academy of Religion conference in Chicago that covered his 1983 Blue Star liturgical music album "Moon Hooves in the Sand." The paper was entitled <a target="_blank"nofollow" class="external free">http://papers.aarweb.org/program_book?keys=Pagan&field_session_slot_nid=All">“Home and Back Again”: Thealogical Community and Reciprocity in Pagan Liturgical Music."</a>" The religious significance of his Blue Star liturgical work as genre-defining is discussed in Chapter 3 ("Love and Relation in the Orphic Tradition: Case Studies in Musical Theologies") of a 2009 Ph.D dissertation from Michigan State University called <a target="_blank"nofollow" class="external free">http://catalog.lib.msu.edu/record=b7246763~S39a">Approaching The Sacred Grove: The Orphic Impulse in Pagan Religious Music."</a>" (UMI#3381106)Somacandra (talk) 07:25, 18 November 2012 (UTC)--Somacandra (talk) 13:53, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • weak keep Meets WP:Music criteria 5 with 2 albums on Kicking Mule, an imprint of the Concord Music Group. Additionally, he has authored at least 2 non-vanity books, for which I did find this review.  The Steve  10:24, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. This article [2] is another secondary source that proves notability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BlueStarOwl (talk • contribs) 16:28, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As a "creative professional," Kenny Klein meets several of the criteria for inclusion in Wikipedia: (1) "The person is regarded as an important figure." He is regarded as such by his core audience, the greater movement of Contemporary Pagans in the U.S., as evidenced by his book sales, his touring schedule, and the popularity of his recorded music. (2) "The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique:" Kenny Klein meets this criterion on two accounts. First, the work he has done in developing the Blue Star tradition of Wicca, which has unique practices and theories due to his work; and the unique approach he has developed for using folk- and fairy-tales for serious inner spiritual work within the framework of Contemporary Paganism. (3) Kenny Klein's work has won significant critical attention within the greater Contemporary Pagan movement. **It is important to note that Contemporary Paganism is a grassroots movements and still a relatively young one; we are only now reaching our second generation, and we are only now beginning to attract serious attention by academic professionals. Our most important contributors have rarely been cited or reviewed by non-Pagan authors or critics, and much of our own journalism in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s was ephemeral and has not been preserved. This should be taken into account when gauging the importance of a cultural figure within a particular movement. I also note that the criteria do not mandate that notable figures be cited, it simply suggests citations as one of several criteria for judgment.** — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anna Greenflame (talk • contribs) 00:28, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. The article needs a lot of work, preferably by somebody other than Kenny. However, I agree with The Steve about notability. Folklore1 (talk) 01:00, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep It's hard for me to judge notability of authors in this field, because libraries rarely collect the books, and the customary book review sources I rely on rarely cover them. But I see for [ WorldCat Identities] that there are a fair number of holdings, especially for Modern magick , and I see there it has been translated into Russian & Spanish, and the author search gives also Polish, and for other books French and Czech. In the absence of other objective evidence I have come to rely on the presence of such translations as an indication those in the subject area think the work worth translation. DGG ( talk ) 02:35, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Kenny Klein did not write Modern Magick. That is Donald Michael Kraig, a different AfD. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 02:49, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I sort of thought I had missed one of these. I moved the above, and my correct !vote follows. DGG ( talk ) 13:12, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral I can only judge the books, not the music. He's not an academic writer , from WorldCat Identities only about 100 libraries hold his most widely held book, and they are not academic libraries. The American Film ref above shows they may none the less be considered important. Perhaps his musical work is to be taken seriously--tbut with respect to his work as an organizer, that part of the article is based unreliable first party sources, and the arguments above mostly deal with personal information & testimonials, To an outsider like myself, such arguments, rather than making a case for inclusion, lead an outside person to conclude just the opposite. Everyone is important to their friends. DGG ( talk ) 13:12, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment On the topic of whether or not Kenny Kline is an "Academic Writer": Kenny Klines book "The Flowering Rod" was in line to be the workbook for the Men Mysteries class at the Woolston-Steen Theological Seminary @ http://www.WiccanSeminary.EDU (the worlds only Wiccan Seminary run by the only Umbrella 501(c)3 Government Recognized Church of Wicca in the world) He did not end up teaching the class due to scheduling conflict that arose, but the meer fact that a notable institution deems his work on the subject to be of quality to teach to College level students, and would make his material the primary material for the class, adds to his notability. Addresses/phone numbers for confirmation of the details posted can be found at the schools website posted above. DustyDionne (talk) 17:27, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I don't know where this lies on the keep/delete spectrum, but accounts Anna Greenflame (talk • contribs) and BlueStarOwl (talk • contribs) seem to have been created in honor of Mr. Klein, if their contributions are anything to go by. הסרפד (Hasirpad) [formerly Ratz...bo] 05:23, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Hmmm. Well, Anna Greenflame does not seem to have offered either a "Keep" or a "Delete". On the other hand, there seem to be two Keep "votes" offered by BlueStarOwl. Rosencomet (talk) 08:03, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I concur with the argument made by The Steve above that it meets WP:Music criteria 5, as well as his work as an author. Additionally, I would offer that his work as an “an elder and a High Priest in the Blue Star tradition of Wicca” would lend itself more toward his inclusion. As an encyclopaedia we should strive to include information that is sometimes found somewhat off the beaten path, provided of course that reliable sources are cited. Hammersbach (talk) 16:40, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

...As the subject of this article, I am neutral as to its keep or delete status. However, I'd like to point out that the originator of this discussion, editor Qworty, seems to have an agenda. He/she has created delete discussions for a great many articles on authors and others involved in the Pagan movement. Here is an example of this editor's conversations regarding Paganism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Stregheria#A_.22Balanced.22_Look_at_a_Satanic_Group.3F . Please note that in the case of that article, his/her reasons for deletion seem more about his/her hatred of Pagans than about notability. I also agree with Hammersback, above: in general, Paganism is a new movement: fairly, secondary sources may have to be regarded as the notability one holds within the movement. Thank you. 2602:306:BCE1:50B0:B838:F4F2:2DDB:BFE4 (talk) 19:17, 21 November 2012 (UTC) Kenny Klein[reply]

Qworty and I often disagree but I support his right (anyone) to nominate any article for deletion. The fact is almost all of the pagan articles recently nominated have serious problems of poor sources, conflict of interest and other issues. These AfD's if nothing else are cleaning up a lot of problems and should be viewed as an opportunity to improve. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 19:35, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 01:37, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - There isn't a single editor entering a delete on this nomination. What "clearer consensus" can you have? Eight Keeps and one Neutral. The nominator has been shown to have a clear prejudice against the religion of the subject. Why has this been re-listed?Rosencomet (talk) 01:59, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request Closure There is obviously a consensus here. --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 22:13, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Kenny Klein is one of the best-known folk musicians in the Neopagan movement, and has been for decades. He is also an author of several books by non-vanity presses, and the founder of a nationally-recognized tradition in his religion. An obvious Keep.Oddio (talk) 13:38, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This author seems to be notable based on WP:AUTHOR, WP:NMUSIC and WP:CREATIVE at least. His published books include three with Llewellyn Worldwide, a notable press, and he's a well recognized figure in his field as a musician, a lecturer and a teacher, as well as being the founder of a religious tradition that is also notable, Blue Star. You may want some of this article's citations or sources to be made better, but he's notable. This nomination should be closed. JuliusAaron (talk) 17:13, 26 November 2012 (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/Kenny_Klein&oldid=1089096340"