Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Linda Ravenswood (2nd nomination)

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. RL0919 (talk) 06:11, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Linda Ravenswood[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)

Nowhere near meeting WP:GNG. It's not clear that the subject would meet WP:NBIO based on the claims made, but there isn't a single RS supporting them. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 05:31, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 05:31, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 05:31, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 05:31, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 07:09, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 07:10, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 07:10, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The article seems remarkably promotional, and this lacks the required reliable sources we need to establish notability. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 07:22, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - This is not a G4 speedy at all; the article was previously deleted before the first AfD completed. It's sort of leaning a touch on A7, though - and without sources that would be a slam dunk. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 07:22, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
delete promotional junk with insufficient sources to pass GNG Jtbobwaysf (talk) 10:07, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per Nom, Dennis The Tiger, and Jtbobwaysf. I do not see any clear notability for a Wikipedia article and certainly nothing to give evidence of a recreation over previous AFD deletion comments. Maybe it needs a little "salting" to hinder the next creation. Otr500 (talk) 12:01, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above; I don't see any GNG-satisfying sources. – Levivich 16:56, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete It seems as if she has some regional notability based on the sources of LA Times and such, but that’s not enough. Once you start scraping the bottom of the barrel for Amazon listings it’s dire. Trillfendi (talk) 17:46, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Notability not met by sources in article (as of this !vote), and my usual search for sources turned up nothing better. It appears this is a promotional piece for a topic that doesn't meet GNG or WP:CREATIVE. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 18:30, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Here's a little tip: If you're listing all the notable entities a subject has worked with, that subject is generally not going to be themselves notable. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Onward to 2020} 19:01, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep She won a grant from the National Endowment for the Arts in 2015 for the play Bike Odyssey LA with co-creator Brian Sonia Wallace. The duo won grants from the City of West Hollywood, the municipal funders MTA and METRO, CICLE and the open source arts initiative ‘A LOT’ from the City of Long Beach. I found one source for the story here - https://www.laweekly.com/5-quirky-cool-things-to-do-in-l-a-this-week-for-less-than-10/ and here - https://la.streetsblog.org/2014/06/15/the-pedal-powered-street-theater-ride-led-by-c-i-c-l-e-and-bike-odyssey-la/ She also has 2 Pushcart noms - 1 in 2012 and 1 in 2013 User:Jesuitsally (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 12:28, 26 December 2019 (UTC) — Jesuitsally (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Neither of those sources mention her, making them utterly useless as sources on her. If anything, they prove the notability of CICLE; as I alluded to above, notability as Wikipedia defines it is not inheritable. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Onward to 2020} 20:09, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not to mention that, per our biographical policy, there needs to be strong third-party sources for every claim present in or added to the article; any claim that doesn't have a proportionately strong source needs removed. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Onward to 2020} 20:13, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Quick search of author finds these sources:

on founding publishing company the los angeles press in 2018 https://larbpublab.com/los-angeles-press/ also found titles: 2012 isbn 978-0-9830435-3-9 mouthfeel press texas : 2019 isbn 978-1-940605-15-9 on amazon and https://www.ebay.com/itm/The-64-Best-Poets-of-the-Year-6x9-trade-paperback-162-pages-Black-Mtn-Press/352790347452?hash=item5223f17ebc:g:QUEAAOSwpVxdfRIF : 2017 issn 2470-3443 foglifter press v2 i2: 2018 issn 0049-1675 university of texas southwestern amer. lit v44 i1: 2013 isbn 978-0-9908119-1-6 foret interieure x artists books los angeles (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valentinaravenswood (talk • contribs) 02:44, December 27, 2019 (UTC)

So, setting aside the mangled citations (I tried searching for those ISBN numbers and found nothing that looked relevant to the subject), this is an interview in the publication of a student summer program, and a poem published in a pay-to-play anthology of unclear significance? Plus you appear to share a last name with the subject?. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 03:20, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed with Rosguill. Those sources are useless - Interviews are not acceptable citations except to prove "This is what <foo> actually believes/argues" and do nothing for notability like all other sources contributed to or written by the subject or their satellites. And if you're citing a dead-tree source you need to include the minimum amount of information to look it up - onus is on you for that. (For books this is: Title, author, publisher, year of publication, pages being cited, ISBN.) —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Onward to 2020} 09:04, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Snow delete - Clearly non notable. The article seems to have been created for promotional purposes and has scarcely improved since. Michepman (talk) 04:25, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to pile on here, but delete. The sources that have been brought to light don't come close to satisfying any notability criteria that I can think of. GirthSummit _(blether) 19:56, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Throwing in every reference you can find that just happens to mention the subject's name isn't really helping. 37 refs of insignificant coverage is still insignificant coverage, it still doesn't add up to anything that can be described as notable. Mattg82 (talk) 01:30, 30 December 2019 (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.