Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Megan Devine


 * 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. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 01:45, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Megan Devine

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No sources to be found about the person that would fulfil WP:NBIO. We have some sources in the article which may mention the author's work, sometimes in passing as in the NYT student assignment, but don't give basic details about the author such as education, birth place or date, etc. ☆ Bri (talk) 00:27, 12 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep The article is far from perfect, but it looks to me that their are plenty of secondary sources, and therefore it should meet WP:NBIO. Tell me if I'm missing something, but most of the sources look OK to me. Puddleglum  2.0   00:34, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Sourcing: 1 = author thumbnail, not the greatest source, 2-4 = mentions of subject's work, 5 = interview, which is WP:PRIMARY, 6-7 = mentions of subject's work, 8 = interview, 9 = "growing weed", probably domain hijack, unable to evaluate original source 10 = passing mention/quote of subject, 11 = interview, 12-23 = WP:PRIMARY subject's own works, 24 = advert for subject as conference speaker.
 * Just expanding a bit on the NYT sources, to show how unsuitable they are, the entirety of the material in #2 is One book, “It’s OK That You’re Not OK,” by Megan Devine of Portland, Ore., has the telling subtitle “Meeting Grief and Loss in a Culture That Doesn’t Understand.” It grew out of the tragic loss of her beloved partner, who drowned at age 39 while the couple was on vacation.; the entirety of the material in #3 merely quotes #2; the entirety of the material in #4 is Not only is that unlikely to boost his mood, it could backfire by reinforcing his sense that you just don’t get it, said Megan Devine, a psychotherapist and the author of “It’s O.K. That You’re Not O.K.
 * None of this is sufficient for "significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject". ☆ Bri (talk) 00:58, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry, didn't get the ping. I still thing the subject is notable enough for her own article, but the sources the author chose are unsuitable for sure. Maybe Move to draftspace and notify the author, so that they can improve sourcing? Thanks! Puddleglum  2.0   15:35, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 00:54, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 00:54, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 00:54, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maine-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 00:54, 12 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete There are not enough indepedent, indepth secondary sources to meet GNG. Weare not supposed to be sourcing articles to the subject's own work.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:27, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete No significant coverage, and therefore fails WP:GNG as per analysis above. Jmertel23 (talk) 12:29, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment: Note there are two other Devine's, one's a horse rider and another's a Scottish mom. PK650 (talk) 22:35, 16 January 2020 (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.