Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lee Gold


 * 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. Snow keep (non-admin closure)  D u s t i *poke* 03:30, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Lee Gold

 * – ( View AfD View log )

removed prod so I brought here for a final judgement so it can be added to talk page if its keep or deleted if not..as apparently its been tagged for notability before. Tracer9999 (talk) 18:20, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions.  -- ukexpat (talk) 18:57, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions.  -- ukexpat (talk) 18:58, 10 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep - sourcing could use a bit of beefing up, but her notability is clear in two different fields. (Full disclosure: I have been published in Xenofilkia (as has my wife); and have worked professionally in the role-playing game industry.) -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  19:11, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - article is about a non notable, non relevant, fandom writer and editor, her greatest contribution to the role-playing universe is Xenofilkia which redirects to the page itself, and the page is filled with red links, which contributes to the fact that the article does not meet Wikipedia's notability requirements. Eduemoni↑talk↓  19:23, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note - if the article gets deleted its content should be merged into Alarums and Excursions. Ed</b><b style="color:#C13">ue</b><b style="color:#D35">mo</b><b style="color:#E57">ni</b><sup style='color:green'>↑talk↓ </b> 19:23, 10 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Strong keep - sourcing can be improved and article can be further fleshed out, but she has won multiple awards and has long been active in a variety of fields: a writer of role playing games, publisher/editor of both long-running and notable gaming fanzine and filk fanzine. Shsilver (talk) 19:36, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - The award I see is a single one for a game periodical. he/she was just the publisher and that does not necessarily make you notable because the newsletter may or may not be, the XENOFILKIA website looks like a personal website from 1992.  and  is filkontario the definitive filk source (whatever that is)  I mean I got an award for a spelling bee once.  that doesn't make me notable.  seems to me that most people have no idea what filk even is much less filk ontario.  Maybe the person has other more substantial awards based on them personally.. but in the article I am not seeing it.  And thats part of the problem is that it is very poorly sourced.  as it stand absent something I am missing, I dont see any reason to keep this. -Tracer9999 (talk) 19:45, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * reply - looks like a bad case of WP:IDONTKNOWIT. You admit to being clueless as to what filk music is, you seem unable to figure out that Lee is female, and you don't understand that a record stretching back decades, with two widely-known publications in disparate (albeit related) fields, is part of her notability, and you apparently didn't read the article about Alarums and Excursions, which has a solid article right here in Wikipedia! -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  20:14, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep as the subject is both an award-winning editor and an inductee into the Filk Hall of Fame and thus easily crosses the notability threshold. The number of redlinks in an article is indicative of nothing for AfD purposes (AfD is not cleanup) and supportive of WP:BUILD. - Dravecky (talk) 19:46, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - The award that the author received is also not notable, and the relevance of the author for Wikipedia is greatly reduced by the fact that most of his publications are within local and limited periodicals and they don't even have a great influence on the scenario of filk or game fanzine, per Google. And about Alarums and Excursions, the article is bad written, and not does not complain with an encyclopedia esque, however it is just a bad written article, not a solid article (that would be big and well written), it could be expanded by adding information of its contributors and writers. - <b style="background:#FEE;padding:5px;font-size:10px"><b style="color:#913">Ed</b><b style="color:#C13">ue</b><b style="color:#D35">mo</b><b style="color:#E57">ni</b><sup style='color:green'>↑talk↓ </b> 20:36, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The size of an article is not a signal of notability. Google hits are not a reliable indicator of notability either. - Dravecky (talk) 22:32, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Induction into the Filk Hall of Fame is one of the most notable awards in the field. Xenofilkia isn't "local"; filkers around the world subscribe to it, and it's also one of the most noted publications in the field. BunsenH (talk) 04:31, 12 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep per the cited award. Not a field terribly well covered by RS, so this may look lighter than it actually is. Jclemens (talk) 23:40, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. Most of the subject's coverage is likely to be in hard-to-find, print-only sources, which is not a strong signal of notability. However, as others have pointed out, there is still a substantial amount of coverage, and more important, the subject is identified as an influential figure in an academic text . We do need to be careful about assessing notability based a amateur peer recognition, but the case for doing so is weakestst in fields like these, where "crosspollination" between the fan and professional communities is strongest. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 01:50, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
 * response - indeed, one of the distinguishing features of traditional science fiction fandom is that the distinction between "fan" and "pro" (the latter customarily mocked as "Dirty Old Pro") is considered trivial if not misleading. A Wilson Tucker or a Juanita Coulson is revered far more for their fannish activities than for the things which the mundane world might consider "real" work (although Wilson's Year of the Quiet Sun is a disturbingly powerful novel at a very professional level). -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  03:15, 11 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep - per Orangemike and HW. ukexpat (talk) 14:38, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep per Book search and Scholar search. -- JHunterJ (talk) 20:24, 15 March 2011 (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.