Talk:Courtney Szto

Motion for article deletion - Subject is not notable and article (in current form) appears to be promotion
The subject of this article meets none of the criteria for notability by WP:NPROF, and frankly its existence is puzzling. Everything is well-formatted, but the actual contents of the article suggest promotion/self-promotion (WP:SOAP, obviously).

I'd be interested in an expert opinion here.

Just to detail my case:


 * The cited award, "2021 North American Society for the Sociology of Sport Outstanding Book Award", is clearly not prestigious by WP:NPROF standards.


 * The selected publications, Sport for development and peace: A public sociology perspective and Changing on the fly: hockey through the voices of South Asian Canadians, are not notable.


 * The career section really doesn't list anything particularly notable by WP:N, and is more in the vein of promotion.

I think these three points indicate there's really no justification for the existence of this article. It is bizarre it exists in such a polished form. Howard1738 (talk) 17:57, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
 * For those interested, I will copy what I wrote on my talk page here: While I did write the article in 2020, it lists three in-depth news articles about Szto from reputable sources such as the Globe and Mail and Sports Illustrated. I probably should've been more specific in my description. While I am biased since I wrote this, these do seem to satisfy GNG. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 02:02, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
 * WP:NACADEMIC lists 8 criteria for notability for academics. While not meant to be directed as an insult, the subject of the article clearly does not meet any of these.  Therefore, the subject cannot be considered a notable academic.
 * Is the subject notable outside of academia? I think one could abuse WP:N standards and force a case for why the answer to that could be "yes", citing a few random local news publications (2/3 of the articles used to support this article's existence do just that), but the success of such an attempt would largely fall on the reputation/establishment of the editor.
 * I think it's pretty safe to say the subject of this article is not notable inside or outside of academia. (again, not intended to be an insult)
 * The article comes off as promotional in nature. There are no notable contributions, achievements, etc. (by WP standards) within this article which support its existence.  There are, however, links to selected publications and a career summary more fit for their academic's university Faculty page. Howard1738 (talk) 16:08, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Hey Howard, no offence taken! I’m totally open to conversation and I don’t WP:OWN the article anyways. I’m just a bit confused by what you mean. If she has three reliable and independent sources about her, then she typically passes GNG. I wouldn’t say Globe and Mail and SI are random local news sources. I get why she might not pass N:PROF but saying she is not notable outside of academia is a bit of a stretch. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 16:32, 6 October 2023 (UTC)