Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Faye Flam


 * 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   keep. Lankiveil (speak to me) 10:13, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Faye Flam

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I'm not sure about this one and I can't find any notability criteria for journalists. The subject seems to be a busy science reporter for a leading regional paper. According to the article she was nominated for a Pulitzer (but a lot of people are), though I can't find any mention of the nomination in the citation (#8). There's lots of articles BY her but few or none about her. Fiachra10003 (talk) 02:49, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
 *  Oppose  Keep - There are two basic arguments as far as I can see and none of them stands:
 * Unsourced Pulitzer Prize nomination - the source in the citation #8, page 8 does mention her nomination. It says "the Inquirer's only science reporter, who has been nominated twice by her paper for a Pulitzer Prize."
 * Few or none sources about her - I counted at least a dozen of sources about her. Yes, the article extensively uses sources written by her, but that is not a valid reason for deletion, especially taking in consideration that assertions sourced by her works are not particularly exceptional. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 08:17, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment I see the Pulitzer nom. mention on page 8 of the pdf now, but it's a bit obscure to be really reliable. I tried googling and couldn't find a better cite. Someone else I don't see "a dozen" sources about her, can you be more specific?  That said, the Salon article and the New Scientist book review may be enough to establish WP:SECONDARY (that is, significant secondary coverage in reliable sources) on their own.  FYI, the etiquette for summarizing your position is  Delete or Keep - Saying "oppose" will probably be misread by some readers. Fiachra10003 (talk) 14:23, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep (comment changed to keep) I completely agree that this article needed some cleanup, which I have attempted to do over the past week. I questioned some of the references also but I think they are in good shape now. The Pulitzer nomination is on page 8 of that reference. I have added an RP template to clarify this. "...the Inquirer's only science reporter, who has been nominated twice by her paper for a Pulitzer Prize." In summary, Flam has been nominated for a Pulitzer twice, and has received the Friend of Darwin award from the National Center for Science Education. This satisfies the notability criterion for multiple nomination of a significant award, and also a widely recognised contribution through the NCSE. This should satisfy Notability_(people) Her work in Science Magazine, WHYY, and her Book notwithstanding. -Kyle(talk) 08:24, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment As I mentioned above, I see the Pulitzer nomination on page 8 of the cited pdf. I tried googling and couldn't find a better cite, but news organizations usually put out a press release listing any Pulitzer nominations in a given year - someone else may know where this can be found. Fiachra10003 (talk) 14:23, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I see your point. There are many citations that mention the Pulitzer nomination(s) but it would be useful if that organization published an annual summary (which they do not.) I started to list citations here but that is not necessary IMHO. My JSTOR search found hundreds of articles all written by Flam. If we can find additional secondary citations the article can be further improved. I have changed by comment above to Keep. (signing late) -Kyle(talk) 07:08, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
 * @Khamar / Kyle - you need to sign your posts! You can do this automatically - see the text above the "edit summary". The issue isn't how many articles Ms. Flam writes, it's how many are written about her.  Is there one authoritative source that announces her Pulitzer nomination? Fiachra10003 (talk) 05:10, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I do not know that much about Pulitzer nominations. Here are some sources, in varying strength of authority:
 * 2008 Giant Magazine, LLC, "Best known for her Pulitzer-nominated Philadelphia Inquirer column, "Carnal Knowledge,"..."
 * The Wistar Institute, " Her former column “Carnal Knowledge,” which explored the science of sex, was nominated for a Pulitzer Prize in 2006. "
 * Psychology Today, "She has also been nominated for a little award called the Pulitzer,"
 * It does not appear that authoritative records are available from Pulitzer for nominations. Kyle(talk) 08:05, 23 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:33, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:34, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:34, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:34, 19 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. Meets WP:NOTABLE. Harrison2014 (talk) 17:15, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
 * @Harrison2014, can you explain in a little more detail? Welcome to Wikipedia, but I notice that you've never contributed to Wikipedia before this comment Fiachra10003 (talk) 04:53, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep passes WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 07:48, 25 August 2014 (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.