Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Heather K. Dahlstrom


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 21:58, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Heather K. Dahlstrom

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Film producer with no strong claim of notability per WP:CREATIVE — very nearly all of her film credits, including the only one that's actually mentioned in this article as written, are short films of no particular notability (e.g. winning a notable film award). Furthermore, all of the references here are primary sources which cannot demonstrate notability, except for one article in NOW which verifies the existence and screening of a short film she produced but neglects to actually mention her name in conjunction with it, thus failing to constitute substantive coverage of her in reliable sources. Frankly, given the writing tone and the fact that the creator has never contributed anything else to Wikipedia about any topic at all, I suspect (but cannot prove) conflict of interest editing here. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 07:55, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 08:00, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:16, 13 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. A reluctant delete, since I like to rescue biography articles on the chopping block. My sense is this person has a solid record as a Canadian film producer, with several wins and nominations of awards here but not much media attention, no write-ups that I could find (about 10 SERP pages). Numerous mentions of her as the producer. Maybe in future she'll be back in Wikipedia?--Tomwsulcer (talk) 09:53, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e deckertalk 01:27, 20 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete as no evidence of notability. – Davey 2010 •  (talk)  02:31, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. Has won (or co-won) two awards and been nominated for 4 more, per IMDB.  The two wins are in 2013 and 2014.  Keep until she stops winning an award every year, how about?  Rather than delete only to recreate, as another suggests would be necessary, above.  Also, how many "Heather K. Dahlstrom" and/or "Heather Dahlstrom"s can there be;  is she the same one getting married this coming July 4, and the same one who was Green Party candidate for office in Nickel Belt, around Sudbury, Ontario?  I think she is.  Per Kapuskasing newspaper, she lost, but did better for Green Party in the riding than previously.  The politics/news coverage plus the film stuff adds up to notable, IMHO.  There's a New York Times page on her filmography giving credits for her having even more film roles, e.g. where she was a still photographer or a production assistant.  I am not familiar with this New York Times interface/database, is it a new competitor to IMDB? -- do  ncr  am  23:04, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment. If reliable sources can be found suggesting Dahlstrom meets the GNG requirements, I'll switch, but as far as I know, the IMDb is not a reliable source, don't see other sources on the page which pass muster.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 00:33, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
 * IMDB is perfectly reliable for some info, like what films an actor or producer is listed in credits for. And I think about awards, which are factual, either you got it or not.  IMDB's open content like about bio details of a person, which can be contributed by the person, is regarded by wikipedia editors as not so reliable, as both user-provided and not likely to be verified by others.  So an actor could lie about her age, I believe.  But credits and awards are reliable, AFAIK.  And can lead you to find your way to other verification, if you question something.  I rather expect that a source about the 2014(?) Canadian Film Festival would verify her award there, for example. -- do  ncr  am  11:53, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Specifically, this IMDB page just about the 2014 Canadian Film Festival awards is not likely to have anything wrong in what films won what, and who is associated with those films. And the IMDB page links to the CFF's webpage, where there is this award report which certainly verifies that "Golden Ticket" (2013 film) won best short film there.  There's plenty of documentation available that Dahlstrom was producer on that film.  So, accept the IMDB info on credits unless you have some reason to question it, please. -- do  ncr  am  12:00, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
 * My sense is the IMDb stuff is probably right, although as long as I've been on Wikipedia, I keep hearing reading others dismissing it as a source. But suppose we even accept its veracity in this regard. Consider the article Heather K. Dahlstrom. What is the story here? Like, say you were pitching this article to an editor, who asked you, how is this subject notable? What would you say. Right now, the story is HKD is a Canadian film producer whose film won an award. Congratulations to HKD, but that's about the extent of the story. I used to work as a reporter; my sense is, my editor would roll his eyeballs. Clearly the media don't write much about her as a subject-in-itself, which is really what we need here to meet the general notability guideline. If such material can be found, please present it, and I may change my opinion.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 13:16, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for engaging. Well, one problem with your view, in terms of this being an AFD, is that the AFD is about notability of the topic, especially whether sources are likely to exist.  Not about the current state of the article, about which one can address by putting tags on the article, or, by editing the article.  This AFD discussion includes several sources not in the article, which I think add to establishing Dahlstrom's notability.  You keep addressing the current article alone.  I don't have to pitch the current article as being publication-worthy to an editor;  i am just saying there appears to be sources establishing this person has some importance.  There are more hits in lit searches than I have specifically listed here, too.  Again, thank you for your continuing consideration.  Cheers, -- do  ncr  am  04:32, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Where are the sources establishing notability?--Tomwsulcer (talk) 11:05, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Being an unelected candidate for political office is not a claim of notability that gets a person past WP:POLITICIAN, so the fact that she ran (and lost) as a Green Party candidate is irrelevant to her notability.
 * The thing about IMDb is that it's acceptable for verification of facts about a person's career after their notability has been properly covered off by better sourcing, but it does not constitute proof of her notability as a film producer — everybody who has ever had any sort of credit in a film or television production at all, all the way down to "third assistant best boy's hairdresser's coffee sherpa", gets an IMDb page, so having a profile on IMDb does not constitute proof that the person is automatically notable enough to merit coverage in an encyclopedia — it takes reliable source coverage to get her into Wikipedia, not the mere existence of a profile on IMDb. In addition, because IMDb is a user-edited content site, it is possible (and indeed fairly common) for the information in an IMDb profile to be incorrect in some way or other — which is why IMDb is accepted as an external link on articles about people in film, but not as a reference for the content of our article. And similarly, no other simple directory of film credits — not even if it's on The New York Times website — constitutes inherent evidence of notability either, because it's still just a directory and doesn't provide substantive coverage.
 * And as for the awards listed at IMDb, it warrants mention that a person only gets an automatic presumption of notability if she wins a major film award (i.e. Oscars, BAFTAs, Genies, Cannes) — if she's merely nominated for one, then genuinely substantive media coverage still has to be there, and the mere presence of her name in a list of the nominees is not sufficient sourcing. And if she wins a minor film award such as a "best short at a relatively minor film festival", then that doesn't constitute a valid claim of notability either. So the only thing on that IMDb profile that might get her over the bar is the Genie nomination for Empire of Dirt — but even that doesn't actually get her past WP:CREATIVE if the only source you can add for it is the IMDb profile itself, and not real coverage in real media. Bearcat (talk) 19:47, 22 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete per past outcomes; producers rarely pass through AfD without being deleted. Sorry. Bearian (talk) 17:41, 23 June 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.