Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Heidi Jones

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. لennavecia 15:16, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Heidi Jones

Heidi Jones (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Fails WP:N and WP:CREATIVE. Her career has been simply being a meteorologist on local affiliates. The only thing that makes her different from every other meteorologist on local affiliates is that she is an amateur marathoner and got minor local coverage for participating in marathons. Niteshift36 (talk) 08:48, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:09, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:09, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

• Keep Someone who works on television in New York City has the potential to be known by millions of people....certainly more than a Palestinian jazz musician or Kyrgyz film director. --CFIF ☎ ⋐ 19:42, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
• Delete fails notability standards -- not sure that Palestinian jazz musicians or Kyrgyz film directors have to do with this aside from displaying an editor's possible cultural biases. Bigdaddy1981 (talk) 23:07, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
• Comment: While noting the user:CFIF has authored a number of similar articles (including some in AfD), I'd point out that simply "being known" isn't the standard for notability. Niteshift36 (talk) 04:12, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
• Delete. There is a difference between artists and people who merely have a public job. There are two possible notable article subjects for an artist (or actor or writer or musician etc.): the artist's life and the artist's work. The fact that a body of work is widely distributed, published by major publishers, and so on is a good sign that there will be sufficient commentary in reliable sources to write an article. A similar principle applies to professional athletes (although I think that current inclusion standards are far too wide there for reasons of completeness) and elected officials: you can reasonably write an article about their athletic accomplishments or politics. In all of these cases, their accomplishments are noteworthy acts, events, or artefacts, not merely the products of a job done in the public eye.
  Here, we don't have a performer: instead, we have a person with a public job. All of the coverage is coverage of her (large, notable) employer, not the (interchangeable) employee. "WFOO holds charity event, Heidi Jones, Foo Barson, and Tex Ample to participate" is the typical news story, both for this article in particular and this class of article in general.
  In short, there's no direct coverage of this person save for direct coverage of her employer employing her services. Other articles do exist, but they are dissimilar. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire - past ops) 04:37, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
• Keep Though that the article may have inadequate sources, there's a whole lot more places where you can save one persons bio instead of having it deleted due to lack of Wiki standards or has failed notablity. It would be only fair if there would have someone other than me to find more sources for this article in order to have this article be kept to Wikipedia standards, so please give this article another chance. JD2635 (talk) 07:26, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

• You wrote the article, so one would assume that you felt she was sufficiently notable. Why do you think she was notable? What has made her career different than the hundreds and hundreds of local reporters that don't have articles? Niteshift36 (talk) 07:30, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

• Delete There is insufficient distinction. There will not likely be sources, for there would be nothing to write about at any discriminating level. What is needed to demonstrate notability here is awards or something equallly unmistakable. Unless I am mistaken, the position of the weekend evening staff member is a relatively junior position. DGG (talk) 00:27, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

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.