Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shannon Nichol

Add links
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 no consensus. The article has changed substantially over the course of this AfD, with later comments leaning more towards keep. No objection if somebody wants to renominate this to get a clean discussion starting from the current state of the article. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:34, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Shannon Nichol

[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Shannon Nichol (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

clearly doesn't pass WP:GNG Movedable (talk) 08:48, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 09:29, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete I recovered a few sources from an older version of the article (which looked more like a CV than a Wikipedia article). This Seattle Times magazine supplement article seems to have the most coverage of the subject. The remaining articles that appear to pass WP:RS have one or two mentions of the subject, and are more about the projects her firm has worked on. Landscape Architecture Magazine, Architects Newspaper, HuffPost, another Seattle times. We require multiple reliable sources with depth of coverage; one isn't enough. OhNoitsJamie Talk 13:07, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep She clearly meets WP:ARCHITECT. For example, according to American Society of Landscape Architects, "Her mastery of the art, stewardship, and social responsibility of design practice has enriched and recharged communities, advanced understanding among municipalities and allied professionals, and consistently motivated design professionals to push boundaries...Her strong presence in prominent collaborations and articulate public voice have shifted how peers, clients, and the public think about the landscape architect’s role in complex urban projects." HouseOfChange (talk) 14:42, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
comment she clearly doesn’t meet WP:ARCHITECT. Go read it. This sort of Industry Nomination is complete bumpf. she probably wrote it herself, it’s barely better than citing her LinkedIn profile.94.204.127.101 (talk) 17:05, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with 101. that's clearly not an independent source. ——SN54129 17:22, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That's essentially a press release. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 00:42, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I've been lectured at my talk page for 'abrasiveness' in noting how much promotional and unencyclopedic fluff was posted by the article's creator. I removed large passages and placed them at the article's talk page. There's a balance between the generally constructive agenda of including previously bypassed subjects--in this case a female landscape architect--and choosing marginally notable subjects in the process. There are other issues, as well, per discussion at the article talk page. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 17:47, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete fails our notability guidelines.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:10, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per lack of in depth sources. Initially I looked at the number of sources, most of which cite her peripherally, or acknowledge the firm. Happy to reverse this if more biographical content via WP:RELIABLE is introduced, but I'm not finding it online. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 00:41, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Meets WP:ARCHITECT as previously stated. Wikipedia has a significant bias when it comes to coverage of female architects and it shows in this page. Even 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 originally acknowledged in their own page that this is a notable architect. Note the major works section which is sourced with many notable projects that have their own Wikipedia page. --Carthradge (talk) 02:32, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment (Smiling) Really, Carthradge? Invoking my previous interpretation, after accusing me of discouraging women from editing? I didn't realize you'd value my opinion. Rationale for delete was clearly explained above. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 02:38, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • CommentThis is’t about bias, it’s about notability. The great majority of the sources are about the firm or projects, and are on the edge of WP:RS anyway. Simply working on a notable project does not automatically make the people involved notable themselves. 94.204.127.101 (talk) 02:48, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Carthradge, and the strength of their argument. No indication that the subject meets the basic requirements of WP:ANYBIO: the sources are either press releases (see above) or WP:MILL. Probably WP:TOOSOON, as their position would seem to be the equivalent of an Early Career Researcher. No indication of sustained or persistent coverage in third-party, reliable independent sources. ——SN54129 06:36, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Serial Number 54129: She earned her BLA in 1997; in 1999, she co-founded GGN, which has won a boatload of awards and prestigious contracts for landscape architecture. She is not an early stage researcher. She was recently elected a member of the National Academy of Design (they have only 400-something members in all the divisions of art and architecture); I believe she therefore meets ANYBIO#1 for receiving "a well-known and significant award or honor" in her field. Furthermore, the repeated inclusion of her quotes and opinions in varied articles supports NARTIST#1 "The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers." HouseOfChange (talk) 02:47, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid you've managed to misunderstand the significance of almost everything that you're citing: they either don't support the claim as you suggest or they support they claim of something else to notability. ——SN54129 09:08, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment it's still really just a load of minor mentions in trade press and/or press release type quotes from Nichol. There should be an article for the firm, but individually for her? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Belaythatorder (talk • contribs) 02:52, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Belaythatorder: The claim to GNG would be weak (although supposedly there is a profile of her in Elle) but being elected to National Academy of Design is honor that meets WP:ANYBIO #1. Also clear from the wealth of RS: A) she personally played lead role in several of her firm's major, notable, prizewinning projects, and B) she is "regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers." NARTIST #1 HouseOfChange (talk) 02:48, 26 March 2020 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Shannon_Nichol&oldid=947793671"