Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nick Nostitz

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 ‎Keep. The consensus below is that the sources proffered by Paul_012 are sufficient to establish notability via the WP:NAUTHOR guideline. Eluchil404 (talk) 23:21, 11 April 2025 (UTC)(non-admin closure)[reply]

Nick Nostitz

[edit]

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

Nick Nostitz (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)

No reliable secondary sourcing at present. Neither a books nor a scholar search yielded significant coverage for me. Appears to fail WP:ANYBIO. People reference his work, but I can’t find evidence he is recognised as a significant contributor to his field. OsFish (talk) 15:27, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: reopening and relisting discussion per request on my Talk page to allow Paul_012 to present additional sources, seeing as this was a poorly attended AfD.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 23:16, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, the Bangkok reporting changed my mind and I am now a !vote for a Keep. Iljhgtn (talk) 01:52, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The subject's life and work has been covered in-depth by the Bangkok Post.[1][2] These interviews by The101.World (in Thai)[3] and Expatden.com's podcast (in English)[4] contain in-depth introductory material in the interviewer's voice (the nine short paragraphs that open the The101.World piece and the podcast's written episode summary), which is understood to have been vetted by the author in accordance with the publication's editorial policy, and constitute secondary coverage. The subject's 2000 book Patpong: Bangkok's Twilight Zone had reviews in Publishers Weekly[5] and the Journal of the Siam Society[6], as well as the German Photo Magazin, going by the Google Books snippet.[7] These should satisfy WP:NAUTHOR #3: "The person has created... a significant or well-known work... In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews..." His two volumes of Red vs. Yellow were also reviewed in the Journal of Contemporary Asia[8][9] and have been cited in many scholarly sources.[10] --Paul_012 (talk) 10:58, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep; Paul_012's sources indicate a pass of WP:NAUTHOR even if a pass on WP:GNG is doubtful. Dclemens1971 (talk) 11:04, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment as nominator, staying with Delete. First of all, a thank you to Paul_012 for finding these new sources. Unfortunately, I'm not convinced even with these sources that the topic is notable. Expat media coverage can often exaggerate the specialness of their subjects, particularly when they aspire to be creatives (writers, musicians, photographers etc.) We have to be wary of small fish in tiny ponds. WP:AUTHOR says the subject should have achieved something "important", "significant", "major", created some sort of "monument" etc. That's my sticking point. The coverage in Publisher's Weekly is cursory and even then not so positive, while the review in the Journal of the Siam Society provides positive evidence against AUTHOR being passed. The review itself is one of a collection of five on photobooks, and I think it's fair to say it's clear why it was placed last (p21-22 of the PDF of the review). It's an absolute hatchet job, that starts by sarcastically recounting his claimed credentials and gets worse. Here's an excerpt:

    "Though quite a few of Nostitz's images do stand as satisfactory portrayals of their subjects, too many photographs appear to be the work of an amateur. Subjects are blurred or badly exposed, compositions are unbalanced or just plain bad. Between the chapters of black and white photography appear full-colour double page spreads. Probably chosen to strike a mood, these colour pictures on make matters worse. Evidently short of images to fill the folio, six full pages of white gloss at the back of the book are devoted to just 10 words, and three of them are vulgarities. One remarkable thing about this book, then, is that someone paid for publications of these images in such a format.

It goes on to specifically say "There is nothing remarkable in this story of a Western kid going astray". This is what I'm seeing here based on the evidence presented so far. Someone who may have been well-known to other expats in their community, but who doesn't actually rise to the level of notability for this encyclopedia. OsFish (talk) 05:40, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep His contributions have been featured in prominent European publications such as Stern and Der Spiegel. Besides, subject is renowned for his in-depth documentation of Thailand's political and social landscapes, including works like "Patpong: Bangkok's Twilight Zone" and "Red vs Yellow."RolandSimon (talk) 06:16, 8 April 2025 (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/Nick_Nostitz&oldid=1285237262"