Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brant secunda
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 - Consensus is that there is sufficient reliable source material independent of Brant Secunda and his control for the topic to meet general notability guidelines. Not that this is related to AfD issues, but as for NPOV, it is not Wikipedia's place to balance out reliable source material. If the Wikipedia article is reflective of existing reliable source material, then the article may meet WP:NPOV, even if the reliable source material is POV on balance. -- Jreferee t/c 03:13, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Brant secunda
I came across this article a couple of days ago, and I've been thinking about it since that time. I follow WP:BLP and the notability standards for people, and even the notability standards for religious people that has not been adopted. I decided to bring it here to see what everyone else thinks. I apologize for the length of my comments.
This article has been created at least once before, apparently by the subject's brother (judging by the user name). In July 2007, it was speedy deleted under WP:CSD#G11 and WP:CSD#A7, as blatant advertising and no assertion of notability. It's back now in near-identical form, including the advertising, except it claims notability with an assertion that he "share(s) Huichol traditions with people worldwide."
Online research shows that's exactly what he does, and he does it regularly. I found dozens of links to vacation packages and retreats and seminars to "join world famous shaman Brant Secunda and (someone else) for extraordinary weekend program/weekend workshop/," for the low price of $230 or however much he charges. The metroactive.com link in the EL section, an article in a Santa Cruz, California, even mentions a weekend workshop for $185. I counted 20 of these before I stopped. I was leaning toward placing a G11 tag on it, because three of its paragraphs are identical to the version NawlinWiki deleted under G12 in July. But here's where it gets fuzzy for me.
On Google Books, there are a few books that briefly mention him, but I'm not sure if they rise to the level required for notability, either on their own or together. In this book about rituals in general, his claims of powers imported from his mentor are dismissed in a couple of lines. Here is a mention of his name only, and a book on shamanism has a paragraph not on his current "abilities" but on his trip to Mexico to find a particular legendary shaman. Other books like The Complete Idiot's Guide to Shamanism, have his name only listed in the appendix under "shamans".
So my question is, how do these books, along with the commercial nature of the available references and ELs, figure into notability? Should we even include the books, under WP:BLP? Do links to weekend retreats or vacation packages or workshops, created for or by Secunda, demonstrate notability? Could this become another BLP battleground? I don't know, which is why I've brought it here for discussion.
A shaman of such repute to the modern Huichols doesn't have a mention in Huichol, save a 'see also' at the bottom of the page added by the article's creator in July and left in place – undisturbed and redlinked – until this article was reborn. That by itself makes me wonder about his importance and relevance to the Huichol people. Let the discussion begin. - KrakatoaKatie 08:55, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
- Keep per rationale of nominator. If he's been teaching for 20 years and establishing cultural centers, and there's external documentation, as above, he shouldn't be deleted. See WP:JNN.--SarekOfVulcan 23:47, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
- Of course, if you want to include a reference to that book dissing him, that would be (imho) encyclopedic and help balance the article...--SarekOfVulcan 23:51, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
- Keep as notable and not so POV that it ruins the article. Bearian 00:52, 12 October 2007 (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.
