| Revision as of 07:56, 8 September 2015 editJimbo Wales (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Founder14,540 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 12:29, 8 September 2015 edit undoTarc (talk | contribs)24,217 edits →June Swann: - hard to believe I'm citing wp:before...Next edit → | ||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
| *'''Comment''' - I am wondering if the page nominator could share with us just how he came across this article, and why despite rather good sourcing in the Independent and National Geographic, among others, he decided to nominate. Has the subject herself requested deletion? ] (]) 04:26, 8 September 2015 (UTC) | *'''Comment''' - I am wondering if the page nominator could share with us just how he came across this article, and why despite rather good sourcing in the Independent and National Geographic, among others, he decided to nominate. Has the subject herself requested deletion? ] (]) 04:26, 8 September 2015 (UTC) | ||
| ::As I have discussed elsewhere, I have a shortcut on my toolbar to take me to a random article in the category "British Women Writers". At the time of nomination, the article was . I wouldn't call the sourcing "rather good" at all - it's quite thin and, as I said in the nomination, the article was not actually a biography. I expressed doubt as to whether we can create a good biography. Mkdw has done an admirable job of gathering sources, and so it seems likely that the article can be improved to an acceptable state.--] (]) 07:55, 8 September 2015 (UTC) | ::As I have discussed elsewhere, I have a shortcut on my toolbar to take me to a random article in the category "British Women Writers". At the time of nomination, the article was . I wouldn't call the sourcing "rather good" at all - it's quite thin and, as I said in the nomination, the article was not actually a biography. I expressed doubt as to whether we can create a good biography. Mkdw has done an admirable job of gathering sources, and so it seems likely that the article can be improved to an acceptable state.--] (]) 07:55, 8 September 2015 (UTC) | ||
| :::Jimbo, even I as a passionate deletionist at least ] before nominating an article. ] (]) 12:29, 8 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 12:29, 8 September 2015
June Swann
- June Swann (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)
Not actually a biography, and unlikely that we can gather enough information to make it into a biography Jimbo Wales (talk) 23:47, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 11:45, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 11:47, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
- Comment: If she is indeed "the world's leading authority on historic shoes" and a museum curator, surely there are biographical details publicly available somewhere, perhaps from institutions where she has been employed or from the publisher of her books that are noted in the article. Deli nk (talk) 15:02, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
- Keep. Shoe history is rather an obscure field, but she's a major figure in it. --Andreas Philopater (talk) 23:08, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
- Search for "footwear historian" returns only this article. Considering the other comments, i don't have an opinion for deletion but if she is the only footwear historian, she may need a different description that doesn't appear made up. --DHeyward (talk) 02:55, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Keep It all depends on what we want to consider "significant coverage". this article in The Independent, this feature on her in National Geographic, this article in the Toronto Star, the Barcelona Metropolitan called her "an acclaimed shoe historian", The Baltimore Sun interviewed her briefly in this article, and finally The New York Times has two paragraphs about her in this article and quote her as stating that "she is the world authority on the history of shoe fashions". According to VADS, it refers to her by name and title, M.B.E., suggesting she's a Dame. I wouldn't necessarily call this a home run, but perhaps in the niche world of shoemaking and history, she may be a prominent person. Mkdw 03:22, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:32, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Mkdw 20:19, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
- Keep per Mkdw, it appears significant coverage in reliable sources does exist to support an article per WP:GNG. Winner 42 Talk to me! 15:17, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
- Comment - I am wondering if the page nominator could share with us just how he came across this article, and why despite rather good sourcing in the Independent and National Geographic, among others, he decided to nominate. Has the subject herself requested deletion? Tarc (talk) 04:26, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
- As I have discussed elsewhere, I have a shortcut on my toolbar to take me to a random article in the category "British Women Writers". At the time of nomination, the article was a single paragraph. I wouldn't call the sourcing "rather good" at all - it's quite thin and, as I said in the nomination, the article was not actually a biography. I expressed doubt as to whether we can create a good biography. Mkdw has done an admirable job of gathering sources, and so it seems likely that the article can be improved to an acceptable state.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 07:55, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
- Jimbo, even I as a passionate deletionist at least look around for sources before nominating an article. Tarc (talk) 12:29, 8 September 2015 (UTC)