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. Killiondude (talk) 06:46, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jeni Thornley[edit]

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

Very little coverage in reliable sources besides a couple of incidental mentions in local papers. Fails WP:GNG and WP:ARTIST. Kb.au (talk) 00:33, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Kb.au (talk) 00:34, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Kb.au (talk) 00:34, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Kb.au (talk) 00:34, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I think notability is established, between the obvious claims to notability in a more obscure area, the academic discussion of her work, the encyclopedia entry and the various awards. The Drover's Wife (talk) 01:24, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Feminist film making is hardly an "obscure area". Do you typically argue this on AfDs to "lower the bar" of the notability threshold? Agricola44 (talk) 22:56, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I think citations 2, 3 and 4 are independent and about her, plus there are awards (without citations, adding them would considerably strengthen the argument for Keep). Kerry (talk) 06:50, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. One citation existed, incorrectly in the heading for the table. Now moved and updated for each film listed. Oronsay (talk) 22:40, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The sources are not of the quality that the above "keeps" would imply. The Australian Screen ones are a website, as is the Culture Unplugged one, the OPUS (a database listing of her thesis), and the Jeni Thornley Doctor of Creative Arts one. The Trove site is a library listing of the Love or Money book, but WorldCat only shows double-digit holdings for this 35-year old book. None of these references are worth much for arguing notability. The best are 2 & 3. Number 2 has a quote that goes directly to notability, that the subject has made "landmark films in the history of Australian feminist cinema over the last three decades". However, the journal containing this quote, Screening the Past, seems to be an online-only publication that is not indexed, is not associated with a publisher, etc. I'm not saying it is an "amateur journal", but it is certainly not a mainstream, important refereed journal whose pronouncements carry weight. As for the Encyclopedia, this again is an online-only project started a few years ago by a professor. Again, not something of comparable weight to a Britannica. So, I think this is one of these cases that looks good on the surface, but pretty obviously falls short when you examine the details more closely. Agricola44 (talk) 22:56, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I found additional sources in books and newspapers and one journal article in addition to the sources in the article. I've added them and expanded the article a little. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:06, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per sources added by Megalibrarygirl. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 00:13, 24 January 2018 (UTC).[reply]
Keep: Sources have been expanded, viewpoints look like now meet to the WP:GNG and WP:ARTIST. SA 13 Bro (talk) 01:28, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The coverage in the article has been improved enough with extra coverage of her and her work that it now demonstrates her notability. duffbeerforme (talk) 11:29, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Additions and edits from a number of contributors have addressed the issues raised. Oronsay (talk) 22:45, 24 January 2018 (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.