Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lynn Rogoff

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. Thanks to 4meter4 for significantly improving the article. Mojo Hand (talk) 22:18, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lynn Rogoff (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article was started by User:Amerikids, who was later blocked because the username was promotional. In addition, the subject may have founded a company named Amerikids. A COI tag was added to the article, which was removed by User:September1947, which has only two edits, both to this article and is thus a WP:SPA. Recently User:GreenKids has been editing the article. I suggested that User:GreenKids might have a COI. User:GreenKids made a number of edits including finally editing Talk:Lynn Rogoff with proposed changes. I've made some of the changes, but I'm left with a feeling that the subject of this article is not notable.

Looking at WP:CREATIVE, they might meet one of the criteria, but not the others. They are not important or widely cited. They have not developed a new concept. They did write No Maps on My Taps, but I don't see a writing credit as meeting the requirements for notability. I could be wrong here. Their work is not a monument or exhibition.

Looking at WP:PROF, I don't see that the subject of the article meets any of the criteria. The awards they have received do not meet the notability requirements.

So, is the subject of this article notable because of their writing of No Maps on My Taps? Is this work a "significant or well-known work"? Is it the subject of "of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews"? I feel it is borderline and would like the opinion of others here. Cxbrx (talk) 16:52, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:02, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:02, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:02, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:02, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: I've opened an SPI into the 3 accounts. Curbon7 (talk) 01:48, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to No Maps on My Taps, which appears to be notable. For academics in creative rather than scholarly disciplines, WP:CREATIVE works better than WP:PROF, but I did not find evidence that she passes either of these, nor WP:GNG. (I don't think https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/2003/05/15/the-writing-on-the-wall/3e6ec28d-1074-4924-82ba-79de5090dfe3/ counts as in-depth coverage and I'm not even certain that the Lynn Rogoff that it mentions is the same person.) Because this was created long before Amerikids was blocked, we cannot use WP:CSD#G5 here. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:32, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect as above. Not much found for notability otherwise. Oaktree b (talk) 00:40, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• weak keep it seems both her film No Maps on My Taps and the play Love, Ben Love, Emma has received reviews which makes this a weak pass of WP:NARTIST. She does not seem to pass WP:NPROF. --hroest 21:22, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I have added several references to the article to improve it, and weeded out some unverifiable content. COI is not as big of an issue now. She is the writer for an Emmy Award winning documentary which has had sustained notability (with coverage as late as 2017 in The New Yorker). Additionally, her play Love, Ben Love, Emma has coverage in academic reference works as well as reviews. Between these two contributions, she passes criteria 3 of WP:CREATIVE.4meter4 (talk) 20:17, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I'm happy with 4meter4 edits and removal of COI tag on the article. I felt that this article was borderline notable and wanted to have other editors take a look. I put quite a bit of effort in to the article, but had nagging doubts. I'd like to let this AfD continue to run and see if there is any other input. I'm fine with any outcome, mainly I wanted to be sure that I was not being conned in to keeping a non-notable article. Many thanks for everyone's time. Cxbrx (talk) 22:00, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I would argue that her status as writer for an Emmy Award winning documentary does prove notability, and a fairly wide variety of secondary sources do mention her. 4meter4's point about WP:CREATIVE strikes me as a good assessment. Naomi.piquette (talk) 02:51, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep writer of an Emmy award documentary, establish her notability. Brayan ocaner (talk) 15:24, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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.