Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Heather Gladney


 * 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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 12:33, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Heather Gladney

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

Subject does not meet WP:AUTHOR or WP:GNG. Wikilinks appear to link to the wrong works, no independent sources at all, almost no media coverage, even the personal website is a dead link. Chagropango (talk) 11:06, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2022 August 7.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 11:28, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Women,  and United States of America. Shellwood (talk) 11:43, 7 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete. Probably. Although I would say her website being down should not be a factor. One of the links was indeed pointing to a song by the same name as the play/book, and then redirected to the album that the song was in, but that starting link was wrong, I disconnected it. She seems to have written two books that are mentioned a lot briefly in other books and all over fan pages, but I could not find anything notable. If she did in deed write the plays she is linked to, that would probably make her notable, but I've not been able to find evidence that she did. This feels harsh as events in the 1980s probably tend to be noted offline and the role of women in them is often downplayed. I've love to see the evidence and be persuaded she is notable. Until then, she seems not notable. CT55555 (talk) 03:37, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. CT55555 (talk) 03:41, 8 August 2022 (UTC) I posted it to WP:ARS in the hope that someone can find the sources.
 * Keep per WP:AUTHOR #3. Article has been greatly expanded from nomination. There are 6 reviews, and a notable author Charles Gramlich who says Gladney has been influential for him. --  Green  C  19:46, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep Meets WP:NAUTHOR thanks to sources added since nomination. MrsSnoozyTurtle 22:39, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep Sources have been found that the author meets the subject specific guideline for authors.  D r e a m Focus  01:50, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep I voted delete at first, but since the improvements I see reviews and influence, which satisfies me she is sufficiently notable, I am influenced by the spirit of WP:AUTHOR even though I'm not sure if this follows the exact details, which I think is OK, as per WP:5P5 CT55555 (talk) 14:42, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep as meets WP:NAUTHOR given the reviews. -Kj cheetham (talk) 18:27, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:HEY based on improvements. Comment: There are two "junk" citations (pardon me!) that should be removed: the Gramlich citation is a blog with no editorial oversight; and the ISFDB is user-submitted content like IMDb, which do not contribute to notability. They are both low-quality. Netherzone (talk) 18:49, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Gramlich is a reliable source (a notable author) for the given citation, doesn't matter if he self-published his opinion, so long as its attributed in the text as "According to". It may not be suitable for notability purposes, but that's different. The ISFDB should be a via the actual source is Midnight Zoo journal. ISFDB is useful as a convenience and verifiability link, in this case there is no reason to think the data is wrong. --  Green  C  04:29, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Changed to cite Midnight Zoo. -- Green  C  04:42, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep it's pretty notable and meets the requirements for WP:NAUTHOR Kazanstyle (talk) 08:19, 12 August 2022 (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.