Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cheryl Charming


 * 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 no consensus. There's clearly sources. Some of the sources are in publications which are generally accepted as reliable, general-interest, and national scope. However, there's fundamental disagreement here over whether the coverage in those sources is significant enough to establish WP:N. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:48, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Cheryl Charming

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable, as this is an article created by its subject listing a banal lifetime of jobs, which, if notable, would mean millions of other people also need biographical pages. Angelofmurphy (talk) 02:15, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete far short of notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:28, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 04:50, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Louisiana-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 04:50, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:55, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:55, 16 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete. Self-made biography without enough reliable sources. 🖍S 09:41, 16 March 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by CrayonS (talk • contribs)
 * Keep It appears from a gBooks search that she has a number of publications, including new concepts in her field (bartending), so that she meets WP:AUTHOR. (Using a paint mixer to mix Ramos Gin Fizzes...) Take a a look at the gBooks search, which turns up at least 9 books authored since 2002. A gNews search turns up many mentions in New Orleans-centered publications, but also mentions in outside publications such as: the Telegraph (UK); the Denver Post; and, among the New Orleans publications, she is profiled as mixologist of the year (2014) in New Orleans Magaine. The subject has edited her own article since its creation, but it was initially created in 2016 by an editor whose contributions indicate a broad interest in cocktails and beverages, definitely not a WP:SPA. It can certainly use some additional sources, bu overall this subject appears to meet Notability_(people) at this point. Geoff &#124; Who, me? 17:40, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
 * THe Telegraph link says one sentence about her:"According to the research of New Orleans bartender and author Cheryl Charming and what I’ve been able to find". The Denver Post item is five very minor and fluffy sentences on making Sangria. The myneworleans.com source is good. So that is one source from all the ones you listed that is substantial.104.163.147.121 (talk) 21:50, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Germanhexagon (talk) 08:30, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep: Additionally, she's considered by bar/mixologists as an expert in her field, and her books are used as historical references. In a Daily Beast article, a writer uses her books for research. "According to the research of New Orleans bartender and author Cheryl Charming .... Bergeronn (was born) in Thibodeaux, Louisiana, in 1889, and moved to New Orleans in 1907." There are also articles in local Midwestern newspapers about her book that details all the alcoholic beverages that appeared in American cinema, starting in 1917 with Charlie Chaplin. https://www.thedailybeast.com/is-the-vieux-carre-the-king-of-new-orleans-cocktails
 * The only thing that link says about the article subject is "According to the research of New Orleans bartender and author Cheryl Charming..." that's it, 12 words. It's clearly a minor mention.104.163.147.121 (talk) 21:45, 25 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Uh, Delete let's have a look at those sources. The Telegraph is a single sentence: "Their bar, Bourbon “O”, boasts one of the city’s most charismatic head bartenders, Cheryl Charming, who has a wealth of cocktail knowledge and, if you’re lucky, a magic trick or two for you." The New Orleans Magazine is a decent source, but it mostly talks about the drinks in a fluffy way. She has indeed published books, but I don't think they constitute a significant, major or important contribution to the field.104.163.147.121 (talk) 06:44, 18 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep: She's notable within her field, as there are repeated mentions of her in the trade press (eg) for the on-trade/hospitality industry internationally. The other articles cites (Telegraph/New Orleans Magazine) then give her some coverage outside her specialism. The original nom was a bit strong - there are multiple sources indicating she's about as prominent as a bartender can get. That's not saying a great deal, admittedly. But I'd argue she scrapes in. Mattyjohn (talk) 23:24, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
 * The link you give above is a one-paragraph interview. Not in-depth, and not RS.104.163.147.121 (talk) 21:42, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Since when are professional trade press not reliable sources? Mattyjohn (talk) 20:56, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   10:37, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Significant discussion about her in secondary, independent sources. . I've added those citations to the article. Passes WP:GNG for significant discussion in secondary, independent sources. Passes WP:WRITER for "The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors" and her work "has won significant critical attention." Passes WP:ENTERTAINER for "Has a large fan base or a significant 'cult' following" as she appears to be a local hero in New Orleans, and regularly discussed in their newspapers. Lonehexagon (talk) 05:29, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
 * WP:entertainer says those things for "Actors, voice actors, comedians, opinion makers, models, and celebrities". That's a big stretch for a bartender.Being a local hero does not count on Wikipedia. 104.163.147.121 (talk) 09:00, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
 * "Being a local hero does not count on Wikipedia." What guideline says that? Wikipedia does not discriminate based on locality. If someone fulfills the requirements, that is evidence they are notable. It doesn't matter where they're from, or where their fans are. Additionally, that was only one of the reasons I stated. She's nationally recognized for her writing. Lonehexagon (talk) 16:13, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Just pointing out the obvious: arguing "she appears to be a local hero in New Orleans" serves only to fluff up the candidate and not to help examine their notability.104.163.147.121 (talk) 21:42, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I disagree. I think it's evidence that she passes WP:ENTERTAINER for "Has a large fan base or a significant 'cult' following." Lonehexagon (talk) 04:29, 30 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete the strongest source I can find is New Orleans Magazine : Mixologist of the Year]. Despite PROMO efforts by her friends, fans, or self, subject fails  WP:SIGCOV.E.M.Gregory (talk) 01:32, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
 * FWIW, I am none of those things, but I know a little about the on-trade. However, I'm relatively new to the AfD process. Is it normal to cast aspersions on contributors to the discussion in this way? Mattyjohn (talk) 08:42, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
 * It's fine to refer to the general atmosphere of promotion that certainly exists here. The first random quote I plucked from the article just now is "Charming's first bartending job was at a cabaret nightclub in Arkansas.[6] tending bar for five years aboard a Royal Caribbean cruise ship, Charming began working at Walt Disney World in Orlando, Florida in 1989. She was part of the opening team of Pleasure Island." Someone has to have very serious promotional intentions when they write like that. They have to actually make the effort to find the information and then write up sentences about her entirely routine jobs. Such efforts for inconsequential facts are a hallmark of promotionalism.104.163.147.121 (talk) 21:39, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
 * The purpose of this AfD is to determine whether the topic is notable, not whether the article is well-written. However, an article can be tagged for including promotional language, and that helps encourage editors to fix the issues. Lonehexagon (talk) 04:44, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
 * What about the coverage in The Times-Picayune? It's a Pulitzer Prize winning publication that's been around since the 1800s. Lonehexagon (talk) 04:29, 30 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete I don't think New Orleans Magazine Mixologist of the Year satisfies WP:GNG criteria. Local trade mag coverage doesn't cut it either. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 14:19, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
 * What about the coverage in The Times-Picayune? It's a Pulitzer Prize winning publication that's been around since the 1800s. She receives significant discussion in both those links (in addition to many other sources in her article). The point of WP:GNG is to try to determine whether someone has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. That's been accomplished here. WP:GNG doesn't say anything about mixologists, so I feel like you're saying WP:DONTLIKEIT when you say "I don't think New Orleans Magazine Mixologist of the Year satisfies WP:GNG criteria." Additionally, I feel like that's a false flag because no one in this AfD has claimed she is notable purely because she was Mixologist of the Year. She's notable because of her writing and all the discussion about her and her work in reliable, secondary sources. The fact that so many people are interested in her is evidence that she is notable. Lonehexagon (talk) 02:08, 31 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep Per sources found by Lonehexagon, passes WP:GNG. Nitpicking the awards does not take away the coverage. GuzzyG (talk) 12:20, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep per Lonehexagon and per a search for news sources. Seems to meet WP:GNG as she is verified as being nationally known in bartending circles. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  10:52, 1 April 2018 (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.