Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kerstin Emhoff

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. Some of the discussion goes a bit off the tracks, but there is pretty solid consensus that she meets the guidelines. Mojo Hand (talk) 20:07, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kerstin Emhoff[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)

Not notable. Notability is WP:NOTINHERITED from her exhusband or her exhusband's second wife. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:05, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Minor edits were made for clarification. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:33, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:05, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:05, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Minnesota-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 00:11, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep. No reasoned analysis for deletion. A documentary producer with an extensive resume of productions. Her most production, "AKA Jane Roe" was widely and internationally reviewed. The nom's implicit argument, that a woman whose ex-spouse is notable should be presumed non-notable and there is no need to evaluate her work, is just an embarrassment to Wikipedia. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006. Fight for freedom, stand with Hong Kong! (talk) 02:07, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hullaballoo Wolfowitz, fails WP:GNG is the reason. What sources mention her in significant depth per GNG? – Muboshgu (talk) 02:13, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Don't be disingenuous, Muboshgu. You altered your nomination statement to address my objections (not very convincingly), and to make it look like I had ignored your statement. That's simply unacceptable behavior, as a user of more than 15 years experience well knows, no less an admin. And you've plainly done jack spit to comply with WP:BEFORE. Emhoff's most recent production, "aka Jane Roe," has been widely covered nationally and internationally, including four pieces (two news, two editorial) in the NYTimes alone. Other work has won, inter alia, a national Emmy award. A creative professional is notable principally for creating significant work, and you've done exactly nothing to assess the significance of Emhoff's work. Exactly nothing. And there's certainly a flurry of coverage of Emhoff this week, saying things like "Kerstin Emhoff co-founded a produciton company that works to elevate a diversity of voices. Prettybird, houses directors that are making bold statements and produces progressive content that helps move conversations forward. She also founded a non-profit called Pipelines which is a "mobile discovery app and Foundation" that aims to help people from underrepresented communities break through social barriers to success." [1]

And, again, you've done jack spit to evaluate this or any coverage. All you've done is say "This woman's ex-spouse is notable, so I'm going to assume she only "inherits" notability through him, and even though her work has much more recognition than his, and looks to be more significant, I'm going to dismiss it out of hand." That's not the attitude I'd associate with someone here to build an encyclopedia. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006. Fight for freedom, stand with Hong Kong! (talk) 04:26, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't change the intent of what was said. All I did was add to the explanation of "Not notable", by which I meant doesn't pass GNG, and mention more specifically who she'd inherit notability from. I should have declared those changes though and have now done so. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:33, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. She appears to have a significant body of work independent from her connection to her ex-husband. Moncrief (talk)
Delete Absolute nonsense. Obviously fails WP:GNG, but she must be notable because she used to be married to someone who is now married to someone who might be vice president! Does that make any sense? No. KidAd (talk) 06:39, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as exec producing prizeworthy works is no mean feat. Hyperbolick (talk) 07:24, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Douglas Emhoff, she fails WP:GNG, as the only coverage is either passing mentions or unreliable. Devonian Wombat (talk) 08:52, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 13:04, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: meets or exceeds WP:AUTHOR#3, based on production noted by User:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz.Vulcan's Forge (talk) 16:53, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 16:58, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There seems to be a widespread misunderstanding that WP:NOTINHERITED means that being related to a famous person precludes individual notability. pburka (talk) 17:12, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Pburka, absolutely not my intent. This article was created within 48 hours of Kamala's VP selection announcement. Some of the included sources are clearly more about Kamala than Kerstin Emhoff, and that's where WP:NOTINHERITED is a factor. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:55, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The page may have been created because of her recent proximity to fame, but that's irrelevant to notability. The very first version of the article included the fact that she's an award winning filmmaker: that wasn't addressed in either the original or revised deletion rationale. Recently there have been several AFDs for relatives of famous people with equally vague rationales, e.g. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Odessa Grady Clay (3rd nomination). pburka (talk) 18:07, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The ties to AUTHOR#3 or CREATIVE#1 seem really weak to me. It is unclear what she has actually done on those projects where she got a producer credit. Getting a producer credit isn't an NFILM criretia. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:10, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Don't feel bad. It appears that every individual connected to Kamala – even tangentially – is automatically notable now that she might be VP. Her mailman is getting an article soon, along with her first boyfriend and personal physician. KidAd (talk) 17:59, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Kamala stuff shows up on top of searches but if you search for "Kerstin Emhoff" + producer or "Kerstin Emhoff" + Prettybird she clearly meets WP:CREATIVE #1, heading a Cannes Lion jury,[2] on the advisory board for Ava DuVernay's EEF project,[3] quoted by NPR,[4], etc.[5] etc.[6] HouseOfChange (talk) 19:22, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
delete per nom and after reviewing the sources, this is pretty coatracky and the sourcing is very weak. Praxidicae (talk) 21:37, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep sources aren't great, but passes WP:GNG. - Scarpy (talk) 19:17, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Pburka - easily passes WP:CREATIVE due to major awards; she only got Wikipedians' notice when mentioned due to her famous friend. WP:NOTINHERITED does not apply when the subject has independent notability. Bearian (talk) 14:39, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Not the best article, sounds to some extent like PrettyBird publicity release. But – if kept – the article can be improved. Kerstin Emhoff is notable as a woman executive in the entertainment industry. With a few exceptions like Mary Pickford, a founder of United Artists, women have been absent from the highest levels of management in the entertainment industry until very recently. Wikipedians must not impair the future value of Wikipedia by over-zealously pruning the buds of articles about the current generation of women managers in this increasingly important industry. Paugus (talk) 19:00, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – WP:BASIC, has personally won awards (WP:ANYBIO), has produced works that have been nominated and won awards (WP:CREATIVE).
William Allen Simpson (talk) 20:20, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – note that same nominator also AfD the article about her former husband Douglas Emhoff. That's been considered several times already in the past year, most recently resulting in a speedy keep.
William Allen Simpson (talk) 20:31, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Muboshgu and DemonDays64 are the same person? Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 20:38, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
DemonDays64 nominated it for deletion the second time, Muboshgu the first time. P-K3 (talk) 01:48, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Being the divorced wife of the husband of a Vice-Presidential candidate doesn't cancel out WP:GNG. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 20:39, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep. Kirstin Emhoff is a respected film producer and woman executive who co-founded prettybird and has won significant awards. Women executives are all too scarce in the entertainment industry, and those who make their mark there should be remembered, not written off or disregarded. Her page should not be suddenly deleted just because her husband's second wife, Kamala Harris, has been selected as a vice-presidential candidate. Kamala herself, a friend of Kerstin's, has credited Kerstin with supporting her. Why should Kerstin's biography, which was previously included, suddenly be deleted? It should not. [prettybird.co]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JLorrinR (talk • contribs) 19:11, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Most of the coverage does indeed seem to be in relation to her ex-husband rather than her, but she appears to meet WP:CREATIVE as the recipient of an Emmy award.-- P-K3 (talk) 13:59, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep based on her Emmy she passes WP:ANYBIO Wm335td (talk) 19:01, 24 August 2020 (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.