Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Megan Euker


 * 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. The "delete" !votes have the stronger policy-based arguments. Randykitty (talk) 14:32, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Megan Euker

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Non-notable book agent. Fails WP:SIGCOV. US-Verified (talk) 15:30, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Women,  and Maryland. Shellwood (talk) 16:05, 7 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep: There is a sizeable coverage of the subject in several credible sources related to their field of art and those count for WP:SIGCOV. Though some of the sources cited do not count for notability but that is not to say that there are no sources that support their notability. It requires a careful one-by-one review of the sources cited to be able to find reliable ones due to large number (20) sources cited in the short article. There is already a problem of RefBomb. A before search indicates the subject of the article has done some notable works as well as exhibitions. The issue of COI raised on the article should not have been the reason for bringing it to WP:AFD because AFD is not a place for resolving such issues. If there is COI content the article should be cleaned to comply with editorial guidelines. Myna50 (talk) 08:06, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep - some of the sources cited are reliable and count for notability. LocomotiveEngine (talk) 12:35, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Which ones?  // Timothy :: talk  12:02, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:Artist. Of the three references I checked, two failed verification and one is behind a firewall "meuker" School of the Art Institute of Chicago]. The very specific birth date points to COI as well. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 21:54, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep per the analysis of the sources offered by Myna50 as there are verifiable sources cited in the article. It only takes due deligence reviewing the sources to find useful and verifiable sources. Subject of the article has done a number of international art exhibitions and is a two-time Fulbright grant recipient to Italy. This is an internationally recognized grant. The subject has also mentored several students who have made some inventions and attributed their success to the subject. These events are reported by verifiable sources. Carinco Tuck (talk) 17:33, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment I hope other reviewers will look at the many assertions in the article that have failed verification. Also receiving a Fulbright travel grant does not add to notability. Reviewers might also want to check to page history and contributors - one subject editors. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 19:55, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete: The sources are not Ind RS, most are promotional, none are secondary sources with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indpeth. None of the keep votes above cite sources or notability guidelines. The article has been refbombed with non-independent sources, but no one has bought a single, independent, secondary source. BLPs need clearly reliable sourcing for notability and content.  // Timothy :: talk  12:01, 15 March 2023 (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.