Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarah Kunstler
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. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 03:07, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Sarah Kunstler
- Strong Delete, Article sounds more like a resume or self promotion, and there are serious questions about notability. Pharmboy 22:19, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
- Comment: I fixed this AfD so it would show up properly. Please, when you make an AfD, click on "preloaded debate" and fill out the form properly. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 22:25, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
- Seems fine to me Not so different from other bio pages of children of 60s radicals (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chesa_Boudin) --Sulphite76
-
- Actually, the article you quote is a another candidate, as it is contrary to WP:Notability, ie: being related to someone famous doesn't make you famous. Pharmboy 23:34, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
- keep - seems notable enough, if weakly so. --Rocksanddirt 23:18, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
- keep it- Ms Kunstler is a published Author, has been interviewed for articles in major publications, and is now producing a documentary for PBS
-
- 'now producing seems rather 'forward looking'. Pharmboy 23:34, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
-
- Think I saw "Getting Through to the President" on The Sundance Channel. Definitely heard about it somewhere. --Sulphite76
- Not to be contrary, but hard to consider her notability using information that isn't even in the article itself. Heads up, I also submitted Chesa Boudin for same reason. Not everyone is WP:BIO worthy. Pharmboy 00:49, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
- Sundance Channel and Getting Through to the President are both in the article - perhaps a later edit than the one you marked for deletion. --Mediamaker 00:56, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
- Comment AFD considers information that isn't "in the article itself" all the time. Consensus is based on whether the topic passes the notability guideline, not on the state of the article; cleanup or tag for sources is a valid outcome of AFD. --Dhartung | Talk 01:40, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
- I agree that you can consider info not in the article to determine notability, but there is also a limit as to how far someone should be expected to go to find this info, before expressing an opinion. I've noticed often a nomination is the prod needed to get that info finally put IN the article, finally justifying it. (no comment as to current article) Pharmboy 23:09, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
- Joke: Hmm, I thought it was usually the {{prod}} that led to the nomination. >;-) Sorry, couldn't resist. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 09:51, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
- I agree that you can consider info not in the article to determine notability, but there is also a limit as to how far someone should be expected to go to find this info, before expressing an opinion. I've noticed often a nomination is the prod needed to get that info finally put IN the article, finally justifying it. (no comment as to current article) Pharmboy 23:09, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
- Not to be contrary, but hard to consider her notability using information that isn't even in the article itself. Heads up, I also submitted Chesa Boudin for same reason. Not everyone is WP:BIO worthy. Pharmboy 00:49, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
- Think I saw "Getting Through to the President" on The Sundance Channel. Definitely heard about it somewhere. --Sulphite76
- Merge with her father's article until notability is established.--JForget 00:18, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
- Weak keep, alternately merge a summary paragraph to William Kunstler. I think there's a smidgen of notability here but attributable sources are slim. The documentary Disturbing the Universe: Radical Lawyer William Kunstler (film) is also a clear WP:CRYSTAL candidate. --Dhartung | Talk 01:38, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Notable enough on her own, as shown by the refs That being her father's daughter may have given her a start does not detract from her own independent notability.DGG (talk) 01:46, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
- Keep as notable on her own, per DGG, Dhartung and Pharmboy. Needs a reflist badly. Bearian 15:26, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
- Conditional keep: Keep, but tag it for cleanup, and immediately remove the crud that makes it sound like a self-aggrandizing bio from her own website. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 09:51, 28 July 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.
