Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ed Winters

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by HelloMultiverse (talk | contribs) at 13:40, 22 October 2018. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Ed Winters (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)

One minor news article, the rest are his sources for making money. Small number of followers. Doesn't appear to meet WP:GNG. JamesG5 (talk) 14:26, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 17:48, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 17:48, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I think that if this article would have been written as a promotional piece it would have included details that are also included in his personal page or in his twitter account. It would also make him look as the Rockstar of the activist world. But it does not. It is succinct, outdated and it lacks lots of data that is relevant.
When dealing with current  topics, Wikipedia requires notability verified through reliable sources, and this article fits here perfectly, namely, to inform readers of a person who has a notable coverage.  Mr. Winters’ profile, whom I was totally unfamiliar with prior to arriving to this AfD, has superseded the animal protection and vegan activism by appearing, not only in two news events in major international papers, but in many more. I also find little strength in the argument that these news are hardly related to Mr. Winters when he is at the center of the events reported and often the only name mentioned.
Here are the ones I found together with the ones mentioned above (for perspective). All of these sources fit within what internal discussion in WP has already identified as reliable sources (see here and here).
The Daily Telegraph: here, here, and here.
The Guardian: here.
The Huffingtonpost: here.
Evening Standard: here, here and here (see here for a discussion about this source as reliable).
Montreal Times: here.
In scholarly circles, at least: one here.
This list is not counting the myriads of references to lesser reliable sources like the Sun, Metro, or business news, and publications dealing with animal rights or vegan activism. There is something fishy when a brand-new account plunges into AfD debates saying, “Zero reliable sources.” Obviously, this is a statement that cannot be supported by evidence now. Den... (talk) 16:45, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]