Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maria Rita Epik (2nd 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. Consensus is that there isn't sufficient sourcing to establish notability beyond her candidacy. She did other things that were noted, but they do not appear to add up to biographical notability. Star Mississippi 01:19, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Maria Rita Epik

[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)

Fails Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Only notable achievement is winning one Turkish contest which would have led to representing the country at the Eurovision Song Contest, however this participation failed to materialise. All relevant material is covered on the Eurovision Song Contest 1979 and Turkey in the Eurovision Song Contest articles, so a standalone article is unnecessary. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 14:23, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Turkey. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 14:23, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per
WP:BLP1E. Grk1011 (talk) 16:07, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Keep I'm really saying the same thing that was said at the last AfD by someone else. There is an article about her in the Turkish Daily News that also talks about her opening a school in Izmir, which makes her notable mostly for one event, but also for a second event. There is an essay
WP:NOTBLP1E that carefully explains the importance of this distinction. A musician in izmir. (2007, Jul 13). Turkish Daily News Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/newspapers/musician-izmir/docview/328668696/se-2 — Preceding unsigned comment added by CT55555 (talk • contribs
) 26 July 2022 (UTC)

I understand your arguments here. I am unable to verify the newspaper article you included, but assuming good faith there. To counter your assertion however, how exactly is opening a music school considered a "notable event"? There are lots of individuals who have opened schools in the past and will do in the future but I wouldn't count the majority of them as notable enough to be included in Wikipedia unless they achieved other things in their career. Having not accessed the article in question I can't judge its framing, but if it's based around her prevented participation at Eurovision and then what they did afterwards, would that not continue to fall under
WP:BLP1E, as it would then be an extension of the single event to which they would be considered a notable individual? Sims2aholic8 (talk) 08:28, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

The article is about her music. Eurovision is mentioned once, over three sentences. In summary, the short article is about her song Thalassa, and how the song notes the cultural similarities between Greece and Turkey. Then about her church attendance and how it is limited by her music. Then her education, guitar lessons. Three sentences then mention Eurovision. Then her university education, her return to Turkey and the opening of the music school.

So she is notable for at least two events, which is why BLP1E does not apply. I really encourage reading of the

WP:NOTBLP1E

essay, it is just an explanatory essay, but it specifically about this type fo scenario.

To answer, "How is opening a music school considered a notable event?", it's because it made the news.

By the way, ProQuest is available through the wikipedia library, which is free to use for most editors, so you probably have the ability to access this article and all the wikipedia library and ProQuest articles, I would recommend it. CT55555 (talk) 11:13, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, my search of google books found that she also took part in a protest/concert in 1987. I've added that in. This further rebuts the "one event" thing. Of course the other events are minor, lacking significant coverage, but a careful reading of
WP:NOTBLP1E that takes editors through the logical steps of how to get to this conclusion. CT55555 (talk) 13:37, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

I don't think these events are particularly notable though.

WP:BLP1E criteria. Grk1011 (talk) 19:36, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

The thing about the BLP1E criteria is that all three have to be met for it to apply. And one of them is only being noted for one event. In the context of her being noted for at least three events (singing competition, protest concert, opening school), BLP1E is a distraction. CT55555 (talk) 19:41, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Right, which is why I pointed out that none of the other events appear to meet notability guidelines, only the Eurovision appearance that did not materialize. Grk1011 (talk) 12:51, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I beg you to read

WP:NOTBLP1E

, I could copy and paste it here, but it says it so well. I'm at risk of bludgeoning if I keep saying this, but it seems clear you either didn't read it, or disagree with it and if that is the case, please be specific, because it so exactly deals with this scenario.

In addition to that, indeed her opening of a school, her singing at a protest are not individually notable events. That she is associated with these three events add up to notability for her. I put it to you that you ought not to keep saying that she is only notable for one event when I have clearly communicated three events that made books and news. I hope that I've written this sufficiently clearly that I don't need to repeat it again, so I'll avoid doing so and step back here, give space to others. CT55555 (talk) 12:55, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You're latching onto my initial citing of BLP1E, but I clarified above that she does not even appear to meet the standard notability criteria for people. The Eurovision event was just the best redirect target if it came to that, given that it appears to be her most notable endeavor to this day. Grk1011 (talk) 01:23, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ––FormalDude talk 03:51, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:46, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: the last relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Less Unless (talk) 07:27, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This is a page created in October 2011 in the first 24 hours of page creator
WP:NACADEMIC. A reasonable BEFORE doesn't really find anything better than her own CV either. There's really not a single event (or set of events) which would render the subject notable (she didn't get to compete in a notable entertainment contest from 40+ years ago? please...). The collection of very worthy honors bestowed on this apparently dedicated and hard-working human being don't by themselves provide notability. And that's if we concede sources. As it turns out, WP:NOTE does not permit us to assume good faith on sourcing, the pedia has had eleven years to find better sourcing, and the sourcing provided and found doesn't pass the bar for GNG (in my opinion). BusterD (talk) 14:47, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Weak delete - the GBooks results seem to indicate the possibility of support for
WP:BASIC notability (e.g. a 2012 book stating "Famous people of the present-day Levantine community in Turkey include Maria Rita Epik" at p. 256), but my search online and at the WP Library has not found substantially more than what is in the article, which does not appear sufficient to support any notability guideline at this time. Beccaynr (talk) 22:05, 21 August 2022 (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.