Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gorilla and the Bird


 * 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. RL0919 (talk) 17:54, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Gorilla and the Bird

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

"Upcoming" since 2018 with no further progress made. Sources say nothing except that it's coming soon and involves a director who is now dead, likely indicating that the show was aborted with no further verifiable content made beyond what's already in this article. A bunch of "this is coming soon" sources all from the same month do not equal notability if no further progress was made. Deprodded without comment. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 15:36, 31 May 2022 (UTC) *Delete Agree with nom. Donald D23  talk to me  03:06, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:24, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * delete . Haven't we done this before? Either way, per nom. Nothing particularly encyclopedic is going to happen here any time soon. Something encyclopedic happened here. Keep it. casualdejekyll  16:54, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:05, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete nothing notable, unlikely to find anything else. Soooo wanting to put a Simpsons quote about the gorillas freezing to death in the winter, problem solved. Oaktree b (talk) 20:03, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per improvements by Cunard. Donald D23   talk to me  17:19, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep Notability does not expire.  Ample coverage of this.  There is no news it was canceled, somethings take awhile to get done.  I find the book got reviewed at https://www.kirkusreviews.com/book-reviews/zack-mcdermott/gorilla-and-the-bird/   D r e a m Focus  08:48, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * WP:NFTV says A mere announcement that a pilot is in development may be noted in the Wikipedia articles about its creators, writers or confirmed cast members, but absent significant evidence that the pilot has notability for reasons beyond simple confirmation of its existence, the announcement itself is not sufficient basis for a standalone article about the pilot. Literally all we know is that this pilot was going to be made but nothing else happened after the initial announcement. This applies to anything that never gets started; see Articles for deletion/Trillium Circle. The book may be notable, and I have no objection if the article is rewritten to be about the book should enough sources exist. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 14:50, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I go by the general notability guidelines, not a pointless essay you just linked to and quoted from. At the top of that Essay it reads: This is an essay on notability.  It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.   D r e a m Focus  15:51, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete because notability requires sustained coverage. A few trivial announcements at one point in time look like WP:ROTM stuff, and are far below the requirements for inclusion on any respectable encyclopedia. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 22:02, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete As per nomination. MrsSnoozyTurtle 22:38, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep no actual policy reason given for deletion. Artw (talk) 03:49, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I think WP:NSUSTAINED is implied from my reasoning. RandomCanadian figured that out. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 04:40, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Struck !vote replaced below after refactor. -2pou (talk) 17:11, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Struck !vote replaced below after refactor. -2pou (talk) 17:11, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Keep and reframe the article to be about the book instead of the upcoming television series per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources about the book. The book passes Notability (books), which says: "A book is presumed notable if it verifiably meets, through reliable sources, at least one of the following criteria:The book has been the subject of two or more non-trivial published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself. This can include published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books, television documentaries, bestseller lists, and reviews. This excludes media re-prints of press releases, flap copy, or other publications where the author, its publisher, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the book." Sources about the book   The book review notes: "McDermott’s glorious “Gorilla and the Bird” is one of the best memoirs I’ve read in years. The sheer, sharp pleasure of his prose is reason enough to pick it up. The first thing to know about McDermott’s book is not that it’s about having bipolar disorder — lots of people do. It’s that “Gorilla and the Bird,” though sure to be marketed as a mental health memoir, is equally a tragicomic gem about family, class, race, justice and the spectacular weirdness of Wichita, Kan."  The book review notes: "McDermott, who is about to visit Australia for the Sydney Writers Festival, has written a critically acclaimed account of his battle with bipolar disorder, Gorilla and the Bird: A Memoir of Madness and a Mother’s Love. The title is ­derived from the mother and son’s nicknames for each other: McDermott calls his mum “the Bird” because of “her tendency to move her head in these choppy semicircles when her feathers were ruffled”. Cisneros-McGilvrey calls her son “Gorilla” because of his barrel chest and hairy body. ... The book, which gives readers a first-hand ­account of what it’s like to be incarcerated in a hospital for the mentally ill, is as brutally honest as it is darkly hilarious."  The book review notes: "It's a good line, and one that has the added benefit of being true. Zack McDermott should know; he's been through a few stints at mental institutions as a consequence of his bipolar disorder, which he chronicles, with an affable and often rueful wit, in Gorilla and the Bird: A Memoir of Madness and a Mother's Love. ... McDermott's Gorilla and the Bird is the earthier read — warmer, more garrulous and ingratiating. It's less interested in the history of mental illness and the culture of treatment around it, and more concerned with how his bipolar disorder affects those around him — his mother, especially. ... Gorilla and the Bird looks outward, at the many interpersonal connections that bipolar disorder tests, and sometimes breaks forever." <li> The book review notes: "McDermott’s memoir is decidedly offbeat, unfolding like a country song. There’s the law, some good jokes, substance abuse, and love lost and found, but there’s also a keenly felt sense of justice for the people who can’t catch a break in this world ... If the Joads were tanked up on Bud Light and Haldol and Steinbeck were under Hunter S. Thompson’s influence, this might be the result—rueful, funny, and utterly authentic."</li> <li> The book review notes: "True to its subject, zack McDermott's memoir Gorilla and the Bird reads much like the start of a manic episode. Breathless, funny, absurd and often completely inappropriate, it gleefully jumps from place to person to idea, taking on class, race, sex, family and more along the way. ... Although Gorilla and the Bird has been heavily marketed as a "mental illness memoir", a good proportion of the book isn't about mental illness at all; the central theme, in fact, is love. ... The humour and affection with which McDermott describes both his clients and his fellow psych-ward inmates never veers into mawkishness or pity--a rare quality in literature on this topic."</li> </ol>There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Gorilla and the Bird to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 09:09, 6 June 2022 (UTC) </li></ul>


 * Comment: I reframed the article to be about the book instead of the upcoming television series the book is based on. Cunard (talk) 09:09, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * following Cunard's renovation of the article to be about the book, what do you guys think now? Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 16:52, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:HEY etc. casualdejekyll  20:52, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:HEY. Original AfD was about the TV series, but an article about the book with the coverage of the book (not of the TV series) found by Cunard appears to be obviously more appropriate here. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 16:58, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep (struck previous !vote above). Wow!  Nice work, !  I wouldn't have changed my mind based on book sources alone since they're different works, but actually doing the work to re-write the article definitely changes my mind.  The sourcing clearly meets WP:NBOOK, so I'm happy to re!vote.  There is some residual WikiData cleanup that comes from refactoring an article, but a redirect can be created for the old WikiData item, and a new one linked to the book article. WP:HEY, good save! -2pou (talk) 17:11, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep Thanks to the improvements by Cunard. MrsSnoozyTurtle 22:14, 6 June 2022 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.