Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Heather Young (filmmaker)


 * 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. J04n(talk page) 13:23, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Heather Young (filmmaker)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:BLP of a filmmaker, who does not yet have a strong claim to passing WP:CREATIVE or strong reliable source coverage to support it. The main notability claim present here is a student film award, and other than that all she has so far is honourable mentions and top ten lists rather than actual wins of major film awards -- and two of the three references here are primary sources, while the third is a mere blurb in an alt-weekly. As always, no prejudice against recreation in the future if and when she has a stronger notability claim and/or better sourcing -- but as of right now, nothing present here is enough to qualify her for inclusion yet. Bearcat (talk) 16:41, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nova Scotia-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:02, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:02, 6 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep per substantial coverage in reliable independent sources such as here. FloridaArmy (talk) 21:12, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
 * That's the same blurb in an alt-weekly that I already addressed in my nomination statement. It is not substantive coverage for the purposes of clearing GNG, and even if it were it still takes more than just one source. Bearcat (talk) 21:13, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I added another award she received. And here the Toronto International Film Festival chose one of her films as the 10 best of 2016. She's clearly. Notable. Winning awards and receiving coverage. How many "blurbs" and awards does it take? FloridaArmy (talk) 22:42, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Making a top ten list is neither a notability claim nor an award. As for how many awards it takes, one award would be enough if that award were a Canadian Screen Award or an Emmy Award or an Academy Award or a BAFTA, but a hundred awards are not enough if they're all student film awards or mere honorable mentions at second-tier film festivals — the "notable because award" test for a filmmaker requires major awards, not just any award that exists at all. And as for how much coverage it takes, if she doesn't actually have anything (like winning a CSA or an Emmy or an Oscar) that would constitute an automatic notability pass, then it takes actual substantive and reasonably long articles, not just a blurb, to make a person notable just because media coverage of her exists. GNG requires substantive coverage, not just one blurb. Bearcat (talk) 23:34, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
 * The Toronto International Film Festival is one of the world's most prestigious film festivals, akin to the Venice Film Festival and Sundance Film Festival with major studios from around the world frequently using the festival to make their films world premieres. Having an award at this one is a major notable accomplishment. --Oakshade (talk) 04:56, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Sure, TIFF is one of the world's most prestigious film festivals — nobody said otherwise, and I live in Toronto and do a lot of Wikipedia's work on TIFF-related articles myself (you might, for starters, want to check who created all of the actual articles about TIFF's awards), so you ain't schoolin' me nuthin' about TIFF that I didn't already know. But she didn't win any award from TIFF — making a top ten list is not an award. Bearcat (talk) 18:20, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
 * You implied the TIFF was one of "second-tier film festivals," hence the schoolin'. Sheesh. --Oakshade (talk) 01:31, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
 * No, I did not. I was referring to Montreal and Vancouver — the festivals where she got an honourable mention and a student film award — as second tier film festivals. She didn't get anything from TIFF that could be characterized as an award. "Sheesh". Bearcat (talk) 02:05, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
 * The TIFF, when even you admit is "one of the world's most prestigious film festivals," considering one of this person's films as one of the ten best of 2016 is a huge honor and an indication of notability. the Montreal World Film Festival is a highly respected film festival too. --Oakshade (talk) 04:58, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
 * That fact could potentially support an article about the film (the condition being that we would still have to find reliable sources which addressed what the film was about.) But it's not an "award", or a notability claim, for the purposes of supporting a standalone WP:BLP of the filmmaker — because apart from a single human interest piece in her local media, all it got her otherwise was to have her existence glancingly namechecked in articles about the overall list rather than any noteworthy increase in coverage about her. And lots of film festivals can claim to be "highly respected" without actually being on the TIFF/Cannes/Berlinale tier of top-prestige festivals — Montreal's film festival isn't nothing, I didn't say it was, but it's not so very massively uber-notable that a student film award from there would confer an automatic must-include in and of itself. Bearcat (talk) 17:59, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 08:58, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 08:58, 7 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete does not meet the notability requirements for filmmakers. Student awards and blurbs in alternate weeklies are just not enough.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:48, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep - In addition to the awards and the coverage indicated by FloridaArmy, very in-depth coverage from CBC News. --Oakshade (talk) 17:06, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * That's from CBC News's local bureau in the subject's own hometown, not from the national news division, so it's not evidence that she's getting wider coverage for more than just "local woman does stuff". And even if we accept it just because it's the CBC, it still takes more than just one piece of substantive coverage to pass GNG. Bearcat (talk) 20:49, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
 * That's the province-wide CBC Nova Scotia, not just some "local bureau." Between the major Toronto International Film Festival and Montreal festival awards and the province-wide in-depth coverage from now at least two sources, notability beyond a local interest has easily been established per WP:GNG. --Oakshade (talk) 04:56, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Firstly, the CBC does not have provincewide news bureaux as a separate level from its local news bureaux in the cities — "CBC Nova Scotia" is just the branding that CBC's local news bureaux in Halifax and Sydney both use in lieu of "CBC Halifax" or "CBC Sydney", not a separate division in its own right or a higher notability standard. Secondly, she did not win any award from TIFF (making a top ten list is not an award), and her award from the Montreal film festival was a student film award, not a notable film award that passes WP:CREATIVE. And thirdly, we do not have in-depth coverage from two provincewide sources — we have one piece of in-depth coverage from a local source, and one blurb in an alt-weekly, and nothing but namechecks of her existence in articles that aren't about her otherwise. Bearcat (talk) 18:18, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
 * CBC Nova Scotia is a province wide service for the entire province. Just because the it's based in Halifax doesn't mean it doesn't have coverage for the entire province and in fact covers stories in Yarmouth and Sydney which are hundreds of kilometers away from Halifax in either direction. --Oakshade (talk) 20:05, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 13:03, 13 December 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- HindWikiConnect 02:33, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. The CBC coverage is sufficient as the basis for an article, together with the other coverage.  Sandstein   12:37, 28 December 2017 (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.