Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jens Erik Gould


 * 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 no consensus. Since the article was improved, opinions are split, and this has already had 4 weeks of discussion. Michig (talk) 07:30, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Jens Erik Gould

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

All of the sources for this article on a journalist are his own articles and are not WP:INDEPENDENT. He's won Pulitzer Center grants ... which are not Pulitzer Prizes ... so no inherent notability. Wolfson5 (talk) 18:17, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:36, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:37, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Of note is that the article has received significant copy editing, which includes the addition of several references, as stated in the !vote above this relisting.
 * Delete I can't find any independent, reliable sources with significant coverage. Therefore, the subject fails WP:NBIO; he is simply not notable enough to warrant an article. Jmertel23 (talk) 18:49, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete couldn't find any independent sources (but found a lot of things he wrote, which don't count per Wolfson5) to establish notability --DannyS712 (talk) 03:04, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - Doesn't pass any of the criteria listed in WP:JOURNALIST, the relevant notability guideline for this kind of writer. -  t u coxn \talk 16:42, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Since the article was flagged for deletion, I have added a large number of reference citations independent of Gould's writing, including reportage from CNN, Adweek, Bustle and other news outlets on Gould's journalism. I have also added works that have cited Gould, including congressional reports and scholarly publications. I believe these additions further establish the subject's notability and relevance.Dee Roberts (talk) 03:45, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:17, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America1000 23:13, 19 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment - The citations recently added by the article creator seem to be about stories by the article subject and not about the article subject himself. They doesn't seem to prove notability under the criteria in WP:JOURNALIST, the relevant notability guideline for this kind of writer. Here are those criteria:
 * The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors.
 * The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique.
 * The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series) or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.
 * The person's work (or works) has: (a) become a significant monument, (b) been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) won significant critical attention, or (d) represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums.
 * The closest is criterion #1, "is widely cited by peers" but what is required to meet that is coverage about him which analyzes his significance in that regard. The sources added simply show that his work exists, as opposed to telling people who he is as a person. I'm willing to be persuaded otherwise. -  t u coxn \talk 15:28, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   09:44, 25 December 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep The examples of works citing his articles do serve to show that the subject meets WP:JOURNALIST #1, "The person is ... widely cited by peers or successors." Citation does not require coverage about the author of the work cited, nor analysis of an author's significance. From Citation, "A citation is a reference to a published or unpublished source. .... Citations have several important purposes: to uphold intellectual honesty (or avoiding plagiarism), to attribute prior or unoriginal work and ideas to the correct sources, to allow the reader to determine independently whether the referenced material supports the author's argument in the claimed way, and to help the reader gauge the strength and validity of the material the author has used." Coverage about an author would be considered literary biography; analysis of an author's significance would be considered literary criticism. Neither is mentioned in WP:JOURNALIST. RebeccaGreen (talk) 14:37, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - worthy journalist but does not yet meet notability requirements. Just Chilling (talk) 00:25, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 05:54, 2 January 2019 (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.