Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Plantec (2nd nomination)

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. ✗plicit 14:09, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Plantec (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Insufficient RSs to establish notability. Searches revealed nothing better. Has published a couple of books and is namechecked in other sources. Not clear where notability lies - probably as an author. Fails WP:GNG  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   13:53, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   14:52, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   14:52, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as prior nominator for the same reasons I described in the prior nomination. To the closer, also consider the delete vote from User:WomenArtistUpdates from the previous nom. BrigadierG (talk) 18:42, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Agree the notability in theory must come from his work as an author, and he seems to have previously written a successful book but the sources here aren't really about him, and so don't establish his notability. Editing84 (talk) 14:12, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Artists, Comics and animation, Computing, and Colorado. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:24, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I do not see that what has been added to article since it was first nominated has brought it up to GNG. Though the wedding announcement was interesting! --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 20:05, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Based on the sources already in the article and those added since the previous soft delete, WP:NAUTHOR is clearly met, based on the coverage of his work and WP:GNG is met based on his pioneering work in digital human interfaces. Sources include:
  • "Culled of Personality" from The Aspen Times, an in-depth review of Plantec's work and his book Virtual Humans
  • "Build a Virtual Buddy" from the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, an in-depth multiple-page article about Plantec and his book Virtual Humans
  • "Diving into Peter Plantec's brave new world of virtual humans", from On the Horizon, a more scholarly in-depth look at Plantec and his book Virtual Humans

This is exactly the kind of sourcing that was missing from the article and the second and third sources were added to the previous versions. They are all in-depth studies of Plantec and his work in reliable and verifiable sources. My "apologies" for including the wedding announcement that was the only thing that WomenArtistUpdates noticed in the expanded article, which had been included for the purposes of documenting his background and education. To the closing admin, please note that none of the above Delete votes address any of these sources, let alone acknowledge their existence. Alansohn (talk) 00:44, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Agree with WomenArtistUpdates. It looks like the sources added since this was last deleted, including the two of the three mentioned right above that weren't in the article when it was previously deleted, are all from 2004-2005 so they do not show that this author's 2004 book had any lasting impact. This lack of references outside this brief time frame -- other than things like a wedding announcement!? -- show that this person is not regarded as an important figure, nor have they originated a significant new concept, nor have they created a significant or well-known work, nor has their work become a significant monument or won significant critical attention, etc. So, this fails WP:AUTHOR completely. Elspea756 (talk) 01:12, 27 March 2024 (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.