Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jennifer 8. Lee


 * 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. — CharlotteWebb 09:46, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Jennifer 8. Lee
Regular journalist - (not senior staffer, editor), not notable under Wikipedia:Notability (journalists) Rothko65 17:37, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak keep, while simply being a journalist doesn't make her notable, the referenced New York Times/Washington Post articles written about her seem to indicate she has some degree of notability, even though the current article is kind of a mess. Krimpet 17:54, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment, The articles about her are a New York Sun article (not NYT) and a property damage report within a Washington Post article (i.e. not an article about her). Hardly encyclopaedia material.Rothko65 18:03, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep dcandeto 18:09, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep She is a notable journalist for authoring hundreds of stories in the New York Times . In addition, the article includes the two articles about her parties, one 370 words and the other 1900 words. The one in the Washington Post is most certainly about her partying habits and their effects on the premisis. She gets over 98000 Google hits. The claimed guideline Notability (journalists) is NOT a guideline, and may never become one. It is just a proposal created a couple of days ago, and it is misleading to refer to it as if it is policy or an established guideline. The implication that it requires deleting this article is a nail in the coffin for its ever becoming a consensus guideline. Maybe at the Muncie Shoppers Guide one would neet to be a "senior staffer" or editor, but not at a world class paper such as the New York Times. It is also a poor idea to nominate an article then add a Delete comment as if the nominator were a different editor. Inkpaduta 19:55, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep she meets the general notability criteria, that being non-trivial mention in multiple sources. The Washington Post article in fact is about her; to put it another way, if it was just an article about some random woman being sued by her landlady for throwing a party, would it have made the WP in the first place? Also it's entitled Reliable Source, so you know it must meet wikipedia guidelines =) Personally I don't see why we need a separate list of notability criteria for journalists either; just clarify that a byline or a staff profile by your own employer does not qualify as a "non-trivial mention" cab 23:35, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, sources establish notability Alf Photoman  01:10, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. All three independent sources (Leiby, Nugent, and Mayerson-Schneider) are about her (the Washington Post article is hardly a "property damage" report--it's about her behavior and actions).  She easily passes WP:BIO, whereas Notability (journalists) is still a proposed guideline.  -- Black Falcon 03:46, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep she does, in fact, meet the criteria for inclusion. Not to mention I just read about her in yet another source (why she's so popular, I don't know) and had to resort to Googling--my questions were then answered via Wikipedia. DMCer 23:48, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Ms. Lee is one of the most well-known journalists in the United States. That she is "not senior staffer, editor" is irrelevant. Neither was Jessica Savitch. Or is she on the hit list next? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ErieLover (talk • contribs) 01:42, 2 March 2007 (UTC).
 * Keep. I'm not sure she's "one of the most well-known journalists in the United States", but writing numerous stories for a major newspaper that's read nationally makes her well-known enough for an article. JamesMLane t c 06:18, 2 March 2007 (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.