Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alis Rowe (3rd 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. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:50, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Alis Rowe

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

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

Nominating at request of User:Essayist1 at WP:BLPN. Their reasoning: 1. subject has requested the article be deleted on privacy grounds, WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE. 2. subject is not a public figure. 3. subject is not notable by Wikipedia standards, due to only being an author of some books of niche interest only. 4. subject has appeared as an expert for e.g. the BBC but was not the topic of that coverage. 5. most coverage is self-published primary sources MPS1992 (talk) 16:39, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

comment Just for some background, the subject of this page contacted me through my website asking for assistance getting the page deleted, please see my userpage for the full COI disclosure.Essayist1 (talk) 17:01, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:44, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:44, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:44, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:44, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. Lightburst (talk) 00:27, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete (I !voted keep at the first, aborted AFD). I think in cases like this we should respect the wishes of the subject. Wikipedia itself would not be noticeably diminished by deletion. Thincat (talk) 19:10, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, and request at BLPN. Utopes (talk) 19:31, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Borderline notable, and the subject has requested deletion. SarahSV ^(talk) 19:32, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:BIODEL. There is no compelling public interest for the continued existence of this article, and the subject is only just over the bar regarding notability (see past AfD discussions). With that said: while I have no reason to believe that the subject did not make this request I would feel more comfortable if this request were verified to have come from the subject herself. Theoretically anyone could make a deletion request for a BLP and claim they are making the request on behalf of the subject. Paisarepa (talk) 19:41, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thegirlwiththecurlyhair has posted this to Alis Rowe: "*delete I would like the page deleted to maintain privacy of my life." SarahSV ^(talk) 18:37, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per deleters. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:38, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Does not seem notable enough per WP:AUTHOR Peter303x (talk) 21:29, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per others. Barely notable and subject requested deletion Taewangkorea (talk) 02:17, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, this will probably be a "delete" ("duh, coola, anyone for snowies?"), however ("here goes contrarian coola again!"), (1) I note that the previous afd was closed as an uncontroversal "keep" (well no protests on closer's talkpage)). (2) Has there been an actual request from Rowe (as is noted above, anyone can claim they are the person or represent the person concerned. (3) some of the above "deleters" state that Rowe is relatively unknown, may i suggest that amongst British autism groups/people with autism this is not the case. (4) To allay concerns about privacy the article could be pared back to a stub of a few sentence, ie. removal of everything from "Early life and education", "Bibliography" (as these books are mostly self-published), and "Personal life" sections, and some of the "Careers" section. Coolabahapple (talk) 08:58, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ps. and remove their photo, that looks like a selfie. Coolabahapple (talk) 09:38, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

pps. someone may need to get onto the French WP, Rowe article here? Coolabahapple (talk) 10:48, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, just wondering if the nominator or any of the "deleters" above carried out any searches for sources (although it could be argued that the article already has enough)? "Thats a bit harsh coola!" well, a quick search with the goog brings up the following: from The Independent - "8 Best Books About Autism .. Asperger’s Syndrome And Communication by Alis Rowe .. It has simple pictures, is written concisely, and is also useful for people not on the spectrum.", National Autistic Society - "Revealed: Finalists of our Autism Professionals Awards (23 January 2019).. One of the most important categories is Achievement by an Individual on the Autism Spectrum. This year’s finalists are: Alis Rowe, founder of the Curly Hair Project; ..", and National Diversity Awards - "With such a strong impact being made by Alis in such a short time, there is absolutely no surprise as to why she has been shortlisted for the Entrepreneur of Excellence award at the National Diversity Awards 2014." (this source is cited in the article not sure why this award is not mentioned), so with these i reckon its even more of a keep as meeting no. 2 of WP:ANYBIO in the field of autism. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:58, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have spoken to Alis via email and again via her Linkedin to confirm. I am 99.9% positive I am speaking to the real Alis Rowe and the page removal request is genuine. Is there an official way for BLP subjects to verify their identity?Essayist1 (talk) 11:40, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment @Coolabahapple: I think you may be scraping the notability barrel a bit there, the English Wikipedia specifically asks for extensive coverage in independent sources, a book review, a couple of niche awards and a few mentions in niche publications don't make a person notable, only borderline notable. I think most of us agree that the quality of this encyclopaedia won't be significantly negated for losing the article. Plus the subject of this article has requested that the article be removed so she can regain a bit of privacy, therefore WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE applies.Essayist1 (talk) 11:52, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: WP:ANYBIO This person has made a major contribution in the field of autism (authoring books, and articles in magazines) and the subject has won awards for the work. Called out as an expert in the field of autism. A person becomes a public figure of interest and notoriety through public appearances in magazines, on the BBC and through, authoring books. Appears in major media by photo and lengthy non-trivial coverage. Also winning awards and self promotion. The page has existed for four years and passed two AfDs. A notable public person does not have a right to delete their WP article. It does not serve our readers to delete this article. Lightburst (talk) 00:27, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP The last AFD mentioned the Huffington Post article that gives significant coverage of her [1]. I see South West Londoner covering her [2] but not entirely sure about that as a reliable source. Google news search shows them, and 20 Wikipedia articles reference them already, and they have editor oversight and seem legitimate. The Marie Claire article without doubt is significant coverage in a reliable source, I reading the copy she has on her website where she list that and some of the other places she's been mentioned [3]. Able Magazine counts towards meeting the WP:GNG as well. So does Healthy Magazine [4], it a subscription publication. Her official website shows the article, you not able to find it on their official website without paying to subscribe. Dream Focus 04:50, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete (Came here because of the ARS posting.) The claim that someone who has written a certain amount about their personal experience with AS is a "public figure" and therefore forfeits all right to prevent Wikipedia editors from digging up obscure details of her life from sources that, for example, briefly namedropped her, and posting them on a very public forum like Wikipedia, is highly questionable. The fact that one of the above links supposedly "calling her out" actually provides photos of 16 other experts (none of whom, I would hazard a guess, have standalone Wikipedia articles) and doesn't give a photo of her seems significant. Having your name appear in this or that publication doesn't make you a "public figure", and given the legal implications of that phrase I would encourage any editors using it in cases like this to refrain from doing so in the future. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 06:00, 24 July 2019 (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.