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. In reaching this decision I am strongly influenced by the claims in this debate of COI editing and disruption in the article. I find the issue of the notability of student Academy Awards is undecided, and it will remain an open question until such time as it is addressed explicitly in guidelines or otherwise decided by a wider consensus. This delete is without prejudice to a new, properly referenced, article being created by a neutral editor—this deletion should be seen as helpful to that process, allowing a clean start without the taint of COI material. I will userfy the article on request. Spinning Spark 11:05, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Marianna Yarovskaya

[edit]

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

This seems to be a piece of self-promotion. Yarovskaya shoot three documentaries, one of which got a student award. (Obviously a documentary which would get an Academy Award were notable, but for instance athletes can not claim notability for their wins in U-18 or U-23 competitions). There were more awards claimed, unsourced, the notability of these awards is not clear. On top of this, she is claimed to be the head of the research for the An Inconvenient Truth, an undoubtedly notable and much criticized documentary, however, I do not think a head of the research of a notable movie is notable. Note also the discussion on the talk page, which motivated me to AfD this article. Nota also that User:Termiteart was checkused on Russian Wikipedia (where the article was also created and AfDed), and found to be identical to User:Y_marianna [1], as well as to the IP, so that the article was written by the same person. Ymblanter (talk) 16:28, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think the problem is the article seems to have buried the lede with this as yet unsubstantiated claim that she was "head of research" for the Gore doc ~~rather than the fact that she has won arguably the world's most prestigious award for student filmmakers with a student Oscar~~, and appears to have garnered a smattering of significant coverage in reliable sources, which one can find with a Google and Gnews archive search. I've done a bit of rewriting to address some undue weight and peacock concerns. I'd say ~~keep~~ (see below) but reblock the COI editor if she edits her article outside consensus. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:56, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Right now she is edit-warring removing ((fact)) and replacing it with a link to IMDB. Concerning the Student Academy Award, I believe the recipients are not notable just because of this award, same way as for instance a U-18 World Champion in athletics is not notable just because of this, but can become notable if he participates in the Olympics for instance.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:07, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'd never considered comparing the WP:CREATIVE criteria (as I've interpreted them) for a student film award-winner to those underage sports competitions, as you've mentioned. It's a valid argument and comparison, I think. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:32, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete — This subject's contributions to her field have not had any demonstrable impact according to any reliable sources. She exists. But she does not meet WP:ANYBIO or WP:CREATIVE. Nor can she muster WP:BASIC criteria through some sort of contagious notability. Vanity WP:RESUME material supported by junk IMDB cites. JFHJr (㊟) 17:19, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that for a student filmmaker, the Oscar and IDA award for student film would meet WP:CREATIVE. That said, if she's not going to stop adding unsupported claims for herself, preserving the article may be more trouble than it's worth. But my belief is that what we have here is a notable (imo) emerging documentary filmmaker who is just having trouble grasping some of the unique rules of Wikipedia, as she goes about using web based media to help establish her career. There's nothing wrong with that on other sites, no doubt. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:45, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Too bad there are not junior notability guidelines, or many student-level prizes that make people automatically notable. Wonder why that is. (Removing tongue from cheek now). To be a clearly encyclopedic subject, she would have to be notable as a filmmaker or otherwise fulfill WP:BASIC/WP:GNG. None of those is met; and while having won bronze-level student awards may be additive to the notability of a subject that is squarely notable otherwise, the awards here do not begin to make a case in an automatic sense. A catch-22 for thought: if she uses Wikipedia to promote her career, she probably isn't notable enough for inclusion; if she doesn't care particularly much about this user-generated encyclopedia because she's too busy with her career, she has a better chance. Compare another similar AfD discussion. It's perhaps WP:TOOSOON for her now, and this shouldn't be her promotional vehicle. JFHJr (㊟) 22:02, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep Seems to meet WP:CREATIVE to a certain extent, but this edit warring and removal of criticism is troubling. Hoisted by one's petard? I'd go as far as recommending that she be prevented from editing her article altogether, and let other people add information that is not POV or COI. §FreeRangeFrog 19:57, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

She seems to have stopped following my latest warning and explanation; I believe we're dealing with a responsible and sensible person, here. We shall see, I guess. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:43, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you check her talk page history, you will discover that she got over five warnings prior to yours. Some of these she deleted, and she also brought socks to create an impression there is no COI (the article was recreated three times). She is indeed learning and for instance she stopped removing the COI template, but I am afraid it is premature to state that she understands everything. In Russian Wikipedia, her article is currently also at AfD, and she basically started to accuse everybody and state that she is a great cinema director, and the nominator is a layman unable to appreciate this. This is clearly not a snowball keep material, so let us wait a bit. I certainly appreciate your intervention and I cope it will lead to improvements.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:49, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My bad. No, I didn't properly check the page history, no. ~~This is really surprising, coming from someone who would seem to have everything to lose by tarnishing her reputation as a documentary filmmaker by behaving so poorly on Wikipedia.~~ Well, let's see, with all options on the table including reblocking, for sure. We'll have to keep a longterm watch on the page, too, I guess. ~~Talk about an "inconvenient truth". sheesh.~~ Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:13, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Okay, I admit to being very sloppy in tossing the 'student Oscar thing' around. It was a "Bronze medal" she received, not the top prize (which arguably could have been considered a major award for a filmmaker at that level -- or maybe not). I don't believe the other prizes do reach the level of what is intended by "well-known and significant award" at WP:ANYBIO. The secondary coverage does not then separately reach the level required for WP:GNG, imo. That said, there seems to be other agendas at work here. The filmmaker had been legitimately removing what I do agree are WP:COATRACK attacks on global warming science, in the Gore film. The more I look into this, the more I see Ms. Yarovskaya's edits are not the only issue here. While a db-author is not possible due to the involvement of other editors, she has wisely asked that we delete the content until such time as it can be recreated neutrally. So let's please assume good faith regarding Ms. Yarovskaya. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:52, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, she asked the article to be deleted, and it was courtesy-deleted, only to be recreated by a sock in several days in the same form minus the WP:COATTRACK material (and minus the COI template of course). Indeed there are two sides here both pursuing their own agendas, but I am afraid the best solution for the moment would be just to delete the article. If it does not get deleted, indeed, we would need to edit it by taking into account both the neutrality and WP:BLP.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:01, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. -- Cheers, Riley Huntley 02:51, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. -- Cheers, Riley Huntley 02:51, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. -- Cheers, Riley Huntley 02:51, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Can't find any reliable sources myself. Agree with the too soon arguments. heather walls (talk) 06:39, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Keep, but edit and shorten: she is listed in the New York Times in the credits for the Inconvenient Truth as the first researcher, also a Student Academy Award is a very impressive industry award and according to the research whether Gold, Silver, or Bronze - all these are considered Student Academy Awards since the year 1991, which is also reflected in the Student Academy Award Wikipedia page, where Bronze, Silver and Gold are listed as Academy Awards. Which in my opinion definitely meets the "well-known and significant award" at WP:ANYBIO. Agreed that she might have buried the lead with the Al Gore researcher credit as she has other producing and directing credits to her name. Also agreed she probably meets WP:CREATIVE. I would think deletion would be an extreme measure which is ungrounded in this case.Lucyjan (talk) 01:22, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
First edit of this user--Ymblanter (talk) 06:25, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are a lot of Wikipedia articles on filmmakers who won Student Academy Awards as their main achievement, here some examples: Leah Meyerhoff (nomination only), Sarah R, Lotfi (nomination only, Shih-Ting Hung 76.171.97.123 (talk) 16:13, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 00:03, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Delete Not notable. FailsWP:BIO And politics do not come into it. --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 22:00, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --Shorthate (talk) 22:43, 30 November 2012 (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.