Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeanne Galway


 * 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. There were no more objections after Lonehexagon's improvements.  Sandstein  18:47, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Jeanne Galway

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Biography of a flutist created by a now-blocked undisclosed paid editor. Only one source provides any significant coverage of the person's marriage to a knighted man but zero coverage of her as a flutist; the rest are directory profiles or interviews or trivial mentions, not actual coverage of the subject. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:41, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 17:47, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 17:47, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. IntoThinAir (formerly Everymorning)  talk  17:48, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. IntoThinAir (formerly Everymorning)  talk  17:48, 14 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. Satisfies GNG. There are a lot of sources in GNews saying things like "internationally renowned" etc, and being internationally renowned is certainly notable. James500 (talk) 04:29, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * That source is about her husband, and gives her a trivial mention. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:03, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Anachronist, it sure is brief but does say Ms. Galway is "internationally renowned" so may count towards something. The article was on a concert given together but since James is the local dude, it concentrated on him. Since then, Lonehexagon worked hard on referencing the article. All these sources were out there and relevant also before his hard work per WP:NEXIST. How about commenting on what is important to passing the WP:GNG or not? Every comment to the core counts. Or maybe withdraw this nomination altogether? gidonb (talk) 18:04, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:33, 21 September 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kpg  jhp  jm  01:58, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete, product of UPE. Plus, if she really is "internationally renowned", why aren't there more sources about her specifically rather than mentions in articles about her husband? &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 22:13, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
 * PMC, given the thorough referencing of this article by Lonehexagon, do you still hold this opinion? gidonb (talk) 16:09, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete, the article doesn't make a sufficient claim to significance, it looks a mixture of inherited and promotional, tagged paid. Refs aren't worth much, google showing nothing i can see. Szzuk (talk) 18:46, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Szzuk, given the thorough referencing of this article by Lonehexagon, do you still hold this opinion? gidonb (talk) 16:09, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep I found more sources and fixed up the article greatly. It now satisfies WP:GNG for significant discussion in independent secondary sources. Some examples of significant discussion about her: (additional sources in the article) Lonehexagon (talk) 05:17, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:NMUSICIAN criterion #1 and WP:NEXIST. Kudos to Lonehexagon for finding the sources that should resolve the concerns of the delete sayers. Lonehexagon, did you rewrite the article to the degree that the "undisclosed paid" warning is no longer needed? gidonb (talk) 10:06, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, I believe so. Lonehexagon (talk) 15:49, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Lonehexagon! I have removed the warning accordingly. gidonb (talk) 21:44, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Need a little bit more consensus that the newly added sources are satisfactory.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, w umbolo   ^^^  21:17, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep - Three legit sources showing in the footnotes: Newsday, Flute View, and Teen Ink. Don't overthink this, simple GNG pass as the subject of multiple independently published pieces of coverage in sources of presumed reliability. Carrite (talk) 15:38, 14 October 2018 (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.