Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Selby Whittingham


 * 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. v/r - TP 01:48, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Selby Whittingham

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Unsourced biography (possibly autobiography) of a non-notable living person. Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  23:26, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep and cleanup. Plenty of sources seem to be available. What's your reasoning for non-notability? Pburka (talk) 23:47, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
 * response all his publications but one seem to be published by the same obscure society, possibly Whittingham himself wearing a different hat. There is no assertion (far less evidence) that I can see that Whittingham himself, rather than Turner, is notable: no articles about him, etc. There are no footnotes at all, unless you count LinkedIn (not a reliable source for much of anything). Sole author of this unsourced BLP on an art expert is User:Art Experts, whose arguments for retention have included "Dr Whittingham has the right to have his entry which is not promoting him but promoting an interest in J.W.M. Turner, the 19th C painter!". -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  23:58, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Google News shows that he's quoted periodically by the Telegraph, the Guardian and the New York Times as a Turner expert. I think he's got a reasonable claim to notability, regardless of the quality of the article. BTW, I also suspected that the article was autobiographical, but the primary editor has identified herself at Help_desk. Assuming this is accurate, she's neither the subject nor an immediate relation. Pburka (talk) 00:05, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
 * He is an expert on a notable subject; but that does not make him himself notable. I do acknowledge that the editor in question has outed herself (although the plural username and the use of the royal "we" must be abandoned). She writes only about obscure art experts, and is only marginally notable herself. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  00:15, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Pburka, could you please add some of the reference you have found. If you add some that establish his notability then the problem is solved. Bgwhite (talk) 05:11, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
 * He is an expert on a notable subject who has himself received non-trivial coverage in reliable sources over an extended period of time thus satisfying WP:GNG. Note that AfD is not cleanup -- our obligation is to examine the subject, not just the current state of the article. I have now added the references which I identified in my previous comments to the article. Pburka (talk) 14:21, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:09, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:09, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:09, 28 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete Contrary to what Pburka says, there are not "Plenty of sources". As far as the references in the article are concerned, if we ignore the one that just says "www.turnermuseum.org" and nothing more, all but one of the references are written by Selby Whittingham, not about him. The other one refers to Whittingham, but is not about him. It is an annual report of an organisation called "The Independent Turner Society" which, according to the Wikipedia article, was founded by Selby Whittington. Thus, among the nine "references" in the article, we have a total of zero independent sources. Also, not one of the (non-independent) sources contains substantial material about him. OK, so much for the cited references, but what about other sources? Checking the first few dozen Google hits, I found Wikipedia, a few pages on the web site of Whittingham's "Independent Turner Society", other pages by Whittingham or containing brief quotes from him, a couple of websites selling one or more books by Whittingham, and so on, but apart from the Wikipedia article not one single source which contained significant content about him, as opposed to by him. If "Plenty of sources seem to be available" then why not tell us what and where those sources are? Simply stating that they exist without giving any information about them is not helpful, and certainly doesn't establish notability. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:50, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete: Lack of independent sources. The references section of the article is mostly the bibliography of the author.Farhikht (talk) 09:06, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete The analysis convincing made by JamesBWatson is quite convincing. --Crusio (talk) 09:25, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep and please note there are numerous references. Again, what are the reasons for non-notability? This is a well known scholar. If Who's Who in Art? last year (and the 12 preceding years) is not a "reliable course", I wonder what is? There are now ample references to the entry and no reason to discuss deletion. User talk:kanoe114;45 28 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Do you have any more information about that publication? I've tried searching for it on Google books and Amazon with no luck. For example, who are the authors, editors and publisher? Is it this? Pburka (talk) 14:39, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
 * (Found on google books)Who's who in art, Volume 25 by Bernard Dolman. The Art Trade Press, Ltd., 1992 - Biography & Autobiography - 598 pages. Selby Whittingham entry Page 508. "WHITTINGHAM Dr Selby, BA (1964), M.A. Ph.D(1975);art historian;founder of Turner Soc. 1975;" etc. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 15:38, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I've updated the citation in the article based on that. Pburka (talk) 17:34, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep: Noted Turner scholar and expert - Guardian: Selby Whittingham, an expert on Turner Evening Standard: Turner expert Dr Selby Whittingham. (Msrasnw (talk) 16:27, 28 October 2011 (UTC))
 * comment - noted as a Turner scholar, indeed arguably a fanatic (not that there's anything wrong with that). The question is whether he is notable in his own right; and I feel the answer is "no". -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  22:57, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Mike, doesn't "noted as a Turner scholar" meet the criterion at WP:PROF?  DGG ( talk ) 18:53, 29 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep Heavily citated, descriptive, and long enough, I am "pretty sure" WP:GNG is met. – Phoenix B 1of3 (talk) 18:47, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
 * comment "heavily citated"? Note that almost all the citations are to works published by his little breakaway society; and the remaining citations are feeble in the extreme. Most of the biographical material is totally unsourced, including all the colorful tidbits about his mom, his ancestor, etc. WP:GNG is in my opinion nowhere near met. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  22:57, 28 October 2011 (UTC)


 * A possibly useful reference: Is his winning this Frank Mason Prize useful (http://artwatchuk.wordpress.com/tag/the-watteau-society/) to try and save the article? (Msrasnw (talk) 23:19, 28 October 2011 (UTC))
 * Clarrification and a worry about the tone of some of the comments here : I think Dr Whittingham seems not only to have been the founder of the little breakaway society The Independent Turner Society but also a founder of the original Turner Society in 1975 - from which the latter broke away. I am also worried about the tone of some of the comments here - accusing Dr Whittingham of writing this article - accusing him of being a fanatic and calling the Independent Turner Society a little break away society is not, in my view, what we should be doing in Afds. I think this is the sort of thing that gives wikipedia a bad name. (Msrasnw (talk) 13:11, 29 October 2011 (UTC))
 * Keep I consider the publication record sufficient to show as meeting WP:PROF, as an expert on the subject of Turner.    DGG ( talk ) 18:53, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep per sources (particularly press sources) added by Pburka. PWilkinson (talk) 01:14, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep notable and meets the criteria...Modernist (talk) 17:01, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Plenty of sources to pass WP:General notability guideline. Nitalake (talk) 22:22, 3 November 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.