Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Danielle Federici


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 05:44, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Danielle Federici

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Unable to find significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject of this unsourced BLP. Also, I'm not sure if directing a few music videos meets any of our notability requirements. J04n(talk page) 22:23, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.  — J04n(talk page) 22:23, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  — J04n(talk page) 22:23, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete: I'm sure it doesn't, actually. No evidence the subject passes the GNG.  Article unsourced for SIX YEARS.  Sheesh.   Ravenswing  05:02, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Actually, directing award-winning films and/or videos IS a criteria that could show notability. For example, she directed Anytime You Need A Friend which won both a won a BMI Pop Award and a ASCAP Pop Music Award. Apart from being able to confirm those awards, worth noting in searches, is that this person is ALSO a photographer...and is more easily searchable under a modified spelling of her first name.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 08:14, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Reply: The awards normally deemed significant enough to make a film that notable involve Academy Awards, Golden Globes, Emmys and BAFTAs.   Ravenswing  22:51, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Response Pardon me, but that is not exactly correct, as we look to the coverage and notability any award might have to determine if it is a "well-known and significant award or honor" for Wikipedia purposes. And there is no doubt (at least to me) that the BMI Awards and the ASCAP Awards are indeed well-known and significant awards or honors for those involved in the creation of music videos to be seen as a well-known and significant award or honors for Wikipedia purposes.  My comment above was to point out these awards as significant enough for their industry to encourage a diligent search for sources that may then show notability under WP:GNG and WP:CREATIVE.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 01:58, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Terrific, and if you can wrangle a consensus to back the premise that a music video winning these decidedly lesser awards is enough to make everyone associated with it notable by that fact alone, more power to you.  Ravenswing  07:39, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
 * My comments above were to point out these awards as significant enough for their industry to encourage a diligent search for sources that may then show notability under WP:GNG and WP:CREATIVE... for far more than simply being a director of award-winning music videos.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q.; 17:00, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment: Unless I'm mistaken, the song won the awards not the video. J04n(talk page) 17:22, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Now someone is digging into Federici to see if her coverage in multiple reliable sources for 20 years might be used to source and expand the article... showing notability as a individual for the extended significant coverage... or as a reknowned photographer under WP:CREATIVE. Excellent.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 00:05, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:22, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
 * And since the article remains, as it has been for six years, unimproved beyond its original stub, it's obvious that whichever someone was digging, he found no more of a scrap of a reliable source discussing the subject in "significant detail" than existed before.  Ravenswing  12:25, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- -- Cirt (talk) 20:36, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - Unsourced BLP. A brief search for reliable sources yields no substantial results.  It seems that no one has been able to find sources for over 6 years.  Fails WP:GNG.  &mdash;SW&mdash; prattle 21:57, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
 * A sometimes problem with "brief" searches. I think it is less a matter of "no one has been able to find sources" than it is a matter of no one using what is available to expand and improve the article.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 05:28, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - Per Snottywong. Unsourced, worthless micro-stub BLP. Lara  22:31, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Being ignored and unimproved, yes... it became worthless.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 05:28, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. The BMI Awards and ASCAP Awards are given to songwriters and music publishers and have no direct relationship to music video directors. It's possible this person is notable as a photographer rather than a music video director ... but if so, not only would the content have to be rewritten in full, but the article would have to be under a different name, Daniela Federici. If the only way to find information about the subject of an article is to look for her under a different name in a different occupation, I don't see much point in keeping the current version. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 05:12, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete without prejudice toward return of a properly written and sourced BLP. I will myself see about spending some time over the few weeks to write a completely new and different article on her under her more searchable name of "Daniela Federici". It will not be a recreation of the unsourced, one sentence, soon-to-be-deleted  stub, but rather a longer, more comprehensive, and sourced BLP about her as a photographer of some note. Losing the current one-sentence stub because I do not have the time to improve it over the next few hours is no biggie.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 05:20, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Glad you're able to see that the deletion of a micro-stub is not the end of the world. There are many who can't understand that concept.  Good luck with re-creating the article.  &mdash;SW&mdash; prattle 16:57, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * A new article with a different focus is a better option.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 17:56, 4 March 2011 (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.