Talk:List of Michigan writers

Third opinion on red link'ing Joseph Zettelmaier

On December 15, 2013 User:Tokyogirl79 requested a WP:THIRDOPINION regarding the red link'ing of Joseph Zettelmaier on this list with the following arguments:

List of Michigan writers I'm currently in a disagreement with User:Drdpw over the inclusion of a red link on the page. I removed the playwright Joseph Zettelmaier, as he is a redlink but also because I couldn't find enough out there to show that he passes notability guidelines to eventually merit his own entry. I see local coverage, but little else to show he would merit an entry. Per WP:REDLINK red links can exist, but only if they would pass notability guidelines to merit an individual entry. I don't see where Zettelmaier passes WP:GNG. I've left a note on Drdpw's page asking for some proof of notability, but in fairness I want to get a third opinion in on this. This is treading into revert war territory on both of our parts here. Part of me doesn't want to encourage a lot of red links on there because beforehand a lot of people were indiscriminately adding nn people to the list (including themselves), but if they are to be on there I want some assertion that they would merit an article somehow.

Response to third opinion request:

Upon further investigation it is clear Zettelmaier does indeed meet WP:GNG quite easily. First off, Zettelmaier is covered by the Detroit Free Press exclusively on several articles: [1] [2] [3] The Detroit Free Press is most definetly considered a WP:RELIABLESOURCE by our standards. Furthermore, it seems Zettelmaier has an article freely available in a local library through a publication by the American Theater; see [4] (feel free to rebut this argument as I did not investigate further). However, he is also covered exclusively by Concentrate a local online magazine covering news from Washtenaw County; see [5]. He is also covered exclusively by a student publication from Washtenaw Community College called The Washtenaw Voice which by our standards is also considered a WP:RS; see [6] Wether these reliable sources are local or not is irrelevant as our policies are not constrained by locality but by: "significant coverage" which Zettelmaier passes, "reliable" which two of these sources pass (the Detroit Free Press and the student publication; the county magazine is probably an RS too but I did not investigate further), ""independent sources" which these sources are as Zettelmaier is not related to them, and his inclusion on Wikipedia would NOT be considered "an indiscriminate collection of information". So, all in all, we actually do NOT have any reason to believe he is NOT notable. He fullfils WP:GNG quite easily. Now, as closing remark, I recommend to both users to simply back off from this matter and to allow the WP:REDLINK as this matter is extremely trivial and this red link would not affect Wikipedia in any way or form. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 19:22, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

• The only big problem I had is that this is pretty much only local coverage, which is greatly depreciated on Wikipedia because it's in the best interests of the community to represent something that is happening locally. I've never seen an article kept on just local coverage when one goes through AfD. That's my biggest argument here: the coverage is really only local. The only thing that would potentially give notability is the American Theatre award, which he didn't win. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:28, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

• But eh, I'll stop removing any redlinks. We had a problem with people adding nn people to the article, sometimes for themselves and sometimes for others. Many of them had no intention of ever creating the article. They don't have to, but I personally dislike adding people to a list without having any intention of creating the article to back it up. It's my own personal quirk, as I've learned through experience that the chance of someone else creating that article is about 5-6%- very low. Most of the redlinks I've come across has received only local coverage which again- I've seen articles deleted with only local coverage. Many of the redlinks aren't notable and I'm a little leery about leaving redlinks without trying to prove notability when . I still have extreme doubts about whether or not Zettlemeier would ever pass AfD if anyone were to ever make an article for him, but I'll take this article off my watch list. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:35, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

• Consider this: Puerto Rico, in terms of population, is roughly the same size as Detroit. Any news we get for Puerto Rico articles are, by definition, from "local" newspapers (El Nuevo Día, El Vocero, Primera Hora, etc). I looked at it in the same way when analyzing the Detroit Free Press. The Detroit Free Press is "the largest daily newspaper in Detroit." So, why is it OK to satisfy WP:GNG through "local" newspapers in the case of Puerto Rico but not for Detroit when both territories have the same population? That's when I had to incline myself towards inclusion. I understand your concern, but locality is so subjective that it cannot be the sole reason. You need to compare and consider our practices. You also need to look at our policies "from their spirit, not from their letter" since the principles and spirit of our policies and guidelines "matter more than their literal wording" (see WP:FIVEPILLARS). In this case, WP:EDIT, in conjunction with WP:GNG, triumph all arguments since "Wikipedia is here to provide information to people; generally speaking, the more information it can provide [...] the better it is." (see WP:EDIT for that quote)

You are falling into the trap of asserting notability either through the subjects' fame, extraordinary accomplishments, uniqueness, or unusual facts. While those do indeed establish notability, Wikipedia also establishes notability through "significant coverage". In this case, Zettlemeier is notable not through his uniqueness, but simply because "he has been significantly covered by reliable independent sources." If you want to look at a similar case which I used to base my opinion, you can look at Alfred Kidney or Howard Mawson: nothing they did was unique —both were local artists— but they were covered by independent reliable sources so we consider them notable.

You must also remember that our guidelines have a priority: WP:GNG > WP:BIO > WP:AUTHOR. In this case, if he satisfies WP:GNG we don't need to look further.

Now, regarding the red link, remember that Wikipedia is not perfect (see WP:IMPERFECT). So if the chance of someone creating an article out of a red link is low, that's fine.

Remember, WP:THIRDOPINION is non-binding so if you still disagree you can go to the next step and just WP:DRN this. You should keep the article on your watchlist since it's obvious we need eyes on it, and you should continue to remove red links of non-notable people; just not in this particular case.

Hope this helps.

—Ahnoneemoos (talk) 06:16, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

• Nope- I'll leave redlinks where they are from now on. I might be considered letter of the law, but I'm the type of person that believes that a rule has to apply to all or none. Part of my opinion comes because I don't think it's entirely fair to bend the rules for one person and then not for another. I greatly dislike that we will overlook one person because Detroit is supposed to be so big, yet we can have say, a person in LA get deleted because they only had coverage from LA papers and remove the redlink. Seriously, we've had a lot of people from major areas (NYC, LA, etc) get deleted from Wikipedia because the only coverage they had was almost entirely local. The papers are considered to be relatively major and the population fairly large, yet they're discredited as local sources because it's considered to be local interest. Same thing goes for conventions, theater houses, and so on. It's not consistent and it's really not fair for the person/subject who was deleted because of only local coverage in the past. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:19, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Would the a reference books by David P Bianco be appropriate for this listing of Michigan writers? Heat Wave and Who’s New Wave in Music.

I think these two books are important to add for the author,David P Bianco. 2600:1700:189B:5700:6027:DFB6:95BC:3DE7 (talk) 04:15, 16 July 2022 (UTC)