Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dawn Logsdon
- 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. I hope editors arguing to Keep this article now work on improving the sources in it. Liz Read! Talk! 23:30, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Dawn Logsdon (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)
Fails WP:BIO, WP:SIGCOV. Not a single secondary source. All passing mentions. scope_creepTalk 09:49, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 May 1. —cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 10:09, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 10:27, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 10:27, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Louisiana-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 10:28, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- Keep Widespread coverage of films she has directed and edited. Article just must be expanded. Thriley (talk) 19:06, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- @Thriley: I saw you working on to expand it, which is laudable. Do you have secondary coverage? It lot of seems to surface and no depth. WP:THREE will do. scope_creepTalk 19:32, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- I think she meets notability per WP:AUTHOR: "The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work." The documentary films she has directed have received widespread coverage. I have not done a deep search for articles solely about Logsdon, but I think the coverage on her works makes that unnecessary for notability concerns. Thriley (talk) 19:53, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- @Thriley: The subject isnt an author as far as I can seen. She is a creative type. I need WP:THREE secondary sources that prove she is notable. Not passing mentions or interview or PR. scope_creepTalk 18:42, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
- I think she meets notability per WP:AUTHOR: "The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work." The documentary films she has directed have received widespread coverage. I have not done a deep search for articles solely about Logsdon, but I think the coverage on her works makes that unnecessary for notability concerns. Thriley (talk) 19:53, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- @Thriley: I saw you working on to expand it, which is laudable. Do you have secondary coverage? It lot of seems to surface and no depth. WP:THREE will do. scope_creepTalk 19:32, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- Keep It seems maintainable, but some parts of it require (more) sources. 110 and 135 (talk) 16:28, 5 May 2025 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadspike [Talk] 22:21, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
Weak keep The article is not well written and can certainly be improved, but I believe she meets WP:GNG criteria. Go4thProsper (talk) 01:44, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
- 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.