Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allyn Walker

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 redirect‎ to A Long, Dark Shadow. Content may be merged at editorial discretion. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 08:47, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Allyn Walker[edit]

[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)

Having thought about this more, even after initially defending it, at the end of the day I think this is a WP:BIO1E article on a low profile individual. They have been solely covered within the context of a single episode of backlash in late 2021 following comments they made in an interview, following which they resigned from their university, with pretty much no coverage following the incident, failing WP:SUSTAINED. Their citation record is a clear fail of WP:PROF. It's a reasonable proposal that the article could be transformed into one about their book A Long, Dark Shadow instead, per the outcome of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abigail Shrier. Hemiauchenia (talk) 19:06, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

*Redirect to A Long, Dark Shadow per below. Hemiauchenia (talk) 03:54, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Sexuality and gender, and United States of America. Hemiauchenia (talk) 19:06, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Very trivial coverage after the individual got fired, one from the Daily Mail confirming they were hired by a new university; this is about the only other thing I can find [1] and it's a trivial mention from 2022. No sort of sustained coverage in what we have as RS; it boils down to "person says something controversial, gets fired, then gets another job". We've moved on it seems, no longer interested in the story. Very much a WP:BIO1E. Oaktree b (talk) 20:25, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. With an h-index of 4 according to Scopus (much lower than the Scholar figure of 10), this is not a notable academic and does not pass WP:NPROF. The Long, Dark Shadow book has been cited a total of 10 times according to Scholar, so is unlikely to be notable enough to justify having a page on it here. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:48, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It passes NBOOK as it has been the subject of at least two academic reviews [2] [3]. Hemiauchenia (talk) 23:53, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to those, I found [4]. I think the book can qualify as wiki-notable. If there had been no controversy, this would be a mundane case where we refactor the page about the author into a page about the book. See, e.g., Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daisy Deomampo, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aaron Fox (musicologist), and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alam Saleh. XOR'easter (talk) 00:05, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Per BIO1E and the lack of coverage following the individual's firing. Cheers, atque supra! Fake scientist 8000 00:00, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per BLP1E and WP:SUSTAINED ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 00:14, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fine with a redirect, but please purge the history per WP:IAR and WP:DENY. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 08:07, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I feel like this application of IAR needs more justification than a link to DENY. Is the concern that people might read the content in the history, and use the information and sources cited on other articles, contaminating them with the aura of POV? small jars tc 14:48, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. With it being such a highly sensitive topic area, the POV which the creator was blocked for pushing needn't and shouldn't be anywhere on the website. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 17:12, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It also seems to me like a 1E. I probably would change my stance to keep if it was shown there was some in-depth thing about them other than this. SWinxy (talk) 04:15, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this is part of a sustained campaign by a blocked user and several WP:SPAs to legitimize the WP:FRINGE euphemism “minor-attracted person”. WP:TNT and WP:DENY apply Dronebogus (talk) 09:22, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete: This caused several impact by a blocked user and several WP:SPAs to cause a WP:FRINGE. Agreed with Dronebogus, WP:DENY and WP:TNT applied. CastJared (talk) 16:57, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to A Long, Dark Shadow: per WP:ATD-R. TJMSmith (talk) 03:40, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
Redirect to the newly created book article, per above. —Alalch E. 08:01, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per 1E to the newly created article for the E in question. We might as well be rewriting the same article from scratch, but I guess doing it under the title of the book allows for the psychological distance necessary to WP:DENY 22spears' efforts. small jars tc 14:43, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Seems like this is a slam-dunk but just in case, there is an attempt being made at off-wiki canvassing to keep - Tweet. Zaathras (talk) 14:14, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting. The Twitter account is followed by a friend, so idk. A generous interpretation would be to say they're trying to get the article improved. SWinxy (talk) 18:23, 19 May 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.