Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lisa Gale Garrigues


 * 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 delete. –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 23:17, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Lisa Gale Garrigues

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I don't see evidence of notability. The awards are minor, and there seem no substantial third party references.  DGG ( talk ) 05:10, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:09, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:09, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:09, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:09, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:09, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * delete Nom has a point. Article on this journalist who works for small political advocacy magazines is sourced to author bios in the small publications, and really small online publications she writes for. A simple search for her name produced 3 results,  - for a working journalist, that's nothing. The page, written back in 2009, may have been inspired by an article she wrote promoting Longest Walk 2.  It is now large and well-written, with a long list of writing credits - but nothing I can find in the article or elsewhere indicates notability of any kind.E.M.Gregory (talk) 11:14, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. This author/journalist has been "widely cited by peers and successors" and she has received "a well-known and significant award or honor." She has "made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in her specific field." BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 18:36, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment What major awards? I see receiving one of the 10 awards issued that year by Project Censored; inclusion on such a list is not a major award.   I see two awards from small magazines for the best article published in them that yesr. snd an award for associate producer.    "Widely cited"does not mean having a totsl of 8 references in various books, included among the books' hundreds of other references. The books citing here are moistly from very unimportant presses. I see no recognized contribution likely to become part of the historical record.   DGG ( talk ) 20:33, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JAaron95  Talk  12:47, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete, per DGG. Not notable. Kierzek (talk) 12:52, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete My sweeps of US news, California news media, international news, and an unfiltered search did not reveal much, other than her pieces which she wrote, plus she's a fiction/poetry writer. What is needed are multiple in-depth sources talking about the subject here, why she is notable, etc, although she is interesting artistically with this work here.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 20:34, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment. Remember that this person is a "creative professional." The discussion here should be confined to two things (1) has she received a "well-known and significant award or honor" and (2) has she been "widely cited by peers and successors." If either of these applies, then she should be deemed WP:Notable. Otherwise, we seem to be talking about criteria that do not apply. Is a Project Censored award well-known? Yes. Is she widely cited by peers? Here, there might be some dispute. It depends what you mean by "widely cited." In the case of a narrow specialty like that of Lisa Gale Garrigues, a wide range of citations can be fewer than those that might be demanded of a person with a large specialty. It is my feeling that the subject of the article is Notable on both accounts, but on at least one of them. Yours, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 05:39, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
 * User:BeenAroundAWhile, I just can see what you're seeing. It is true that she has published a small number of articles, but they have not been "widely cited" that I can find.  Her books seem to have passed unnoticed.  the many "sources" on the page are to social media, blogs and the like, or are simply articles she published.  Finding actual sources might be sueful, but for creative writers as for journalists, we need multiple, reliable,secondary sources.E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:39, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of South America-related deletion discussions.  JAaron95  Talk  02:23, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  JAaron95  Talk  02:24, 8 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete Her publications and awards don't correspond with any publications about her.Tangledupinbleu chs (talk) 06:34, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. The Any Bio notability guideline of Wikipedia states that a person is notable if they have received a well known or significant award, which the Project Censored Award is.  A search of Lisa Gale Garrigues and Lisa Garrigues  at the Yes Magazine and Indian Country Today websites reveals a substantial number of her articles about South America and indigenous peoples, some of which have been cited,  indicating a lasting historical contribution in this field. The work she did on the first Spanish translation of Woody Guthrie's autobiography also seems to have merit to the historical record, since   the book is still being discussed in Spain today.    (talk) 23:11, 8 August 2015 (UTC) ABF99 (talk) 23:11, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Welcome to Wikipedia, User:ABF99, but you must understand that the source you brought is a blog. Articles need to be sourced to multiple reliable publications, and several of us have attempted and failed to find such sources for Garrigues.E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:33, 13 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete - notability relies on independent sources, and they simply aren't here for this individual. I wouldn't call the Project Censored Award notable.  Onel 5969  TT me 20:34, 13 August 2015 (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.