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. It appears that sources found during this discussion and recent improvements to the article indicate notability and justify keeping this article. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:36, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Serene (pianist)[edit]

Serene (pianist) (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)

Article creator admitted a COI without being specific, and much of the content came from Alypeters, a blocked paid editor. On top of that, the article is really totally promotional with very poor sourcing (like, Medium--that's not OK). Drmies (talk) 03:39, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: ((subst:spa|username)); suspected canvassed users: ((subst:canvassed|username)); accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: ((subst:csm|username)) or ((subst:csp|username)).

• Comment I find this [1], which looks ok, but that's about the only source I find. Unless more turn up, it's a !delete Oaktree b (talk) 03:46, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Careful, routine coverage of events doesn't qualify, see "Routine events such as sports matches, film premieres, press conferences etc. may be better covered as part of another article, if at all." in WP:ROUTINE. It does help that it is a journalist at Hearst who wrote it rather than an organiser though. Lizthegrey (talk) 08:14, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  It provides some background, not substantial coverage though. Leaning Delete at this point. Oaktree b (talk) 17:01, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, Computing, China, and California. Skynxnex (talk) 04:09, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I know Serene professionally (but not closely enough to be a connected contributor); I'm happy to put some effort in regarding sourcing e.g. Mashable Fast Company Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung but I would agree probably NN as a musician alone. As far as the creator of article - yes, paid contributor, see Brian mansfield indicating that he does PR for musicians and is here to promote his clients. Lizthegrey (talk) 08:07, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lizthegrey, thanks. I don't think that the mansfield edits by themselves are automatically disqualifying and I didn't G5 it because other editors contributed--I am actually more troubled by the later paid editor. I don't think that the coverage you listed qualify her as notable, but there might well be a redirect to an appropriate article and a paragraph there. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 16:30, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Some additional sourcing - Secret Chicago (Secret Media Network), FutureZone de:Futurezone Groton School news (yeah, probably not fully reliable because school publication), and Paris Review (The Paris Review) but not sure how to work it into article. Lizthegrey (talk) 21:48, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep (but rename) Having put some effort in to assemble sources (see above): on cusp of meeting WP:MUSICBIO but also on cusp of meeting WP:GNG through technology work alone; together, I think there is adequate reliable sourcing of multiple sources for the combination even if there's not multiple sources for _each_ category of achievement. This is a case where merger to Snowflake (software) would be inappropriate because Serene's work crosses multiple different areas. The secondary sources in fact note that few people both have professional musical careers without dedicating themselves to it full-time (e.g. conservatory study), and that it's unusual for Serene to both be a professional pianist _and_ notable technologist/entrepreneur at the same time. Lizthegrey (talk) 23:17, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  One issue I think I'm seeing is (musician) doesn't really encompass what is notable and why. Even if Serene is primarily used as a mononym theatrically, her notability is more heavily weighted towards the technologist/engineer side as far as reliable sources are concerned. So, I'd suggest renaming rather than leaving title as is to be clear which notability criterion is the primary one. Lizthegrey (talk) 08:50, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Serene is active in both technology and music, and is therefore maybe a bit difficult to categorise, but her work is notable, I'd say; technology she developed (Snowflake) is vitally important for censored people to access the free internet (via the Tor network or otherwise), and she is mentioned in various mainstream media articles (like the FAZ one linked in the page). Indeed it's unusual for people to have two wildly different career paths like music and technology, but that alone would not be a reason I feel to delete the article, so I'm agreeing with you Liz, that we should keep the article. Also, the article is quite well sourced now, I feel, not just only a Medium link. Aphotick (talk) 12:23, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  This !vote was left by an established user with 2 total edits over approximately one year. Lizthegrey (talk) 08:50, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Hi Liz! Yes, but personal circumstances got in the way in the meantime. I intend, time permitting, to be more active with the edits over time. Aphotick (talk) 14:16, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I think it is important to keep this page as Serene's contribution to censorship circumvention as the creator of Snowflake is too important to delete and is likely to be of increasing interest with the articles about this new Snowstorm. Her musical background is written as a part of her life and not a direct promotion, but even if it were more promotional, it would warrant a rewrite rather than deletion. I discovered this article when researching about Snowflake and was surprised to see it up for removal. A final point about accuracy: from what I can tell it's not correct to say that Snowstorm is an attempt to commercialize Snowflake, as it seems to be doing things differently. I don't want to change it myself, but the article might be improved if this bit was checked and rephrased. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KltpzyxM.rM (talk • contribs) 02:54, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  This !vote was left by a newly registered user whose only edit has been participation in this AfD. Lizthegrey (talk) 08:50, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: While it might seem like there is a consensus to Keep this article, I've grown to have skepticism for accounts whose first edit is at an AFD and we have several brand new, but articulate, editors. So, I'm relisting to get more participation here. Of course, this AFD can be closed at any time.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:23, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Liz! I totally understand you want more engagement from others as well regarding whether to keep or delete the article, and you already know my opinion on it. I understand your reasoning for skepticism with newer accounts, but I was wondering what the strong arguments would be in favour of deletion? Serene seems notable enough, and the article to me seems reasonably well sourced. I took a look at the Wikipedia policies around AFD, but maybe you can shine a light here on the reasoning. Thanks. Aphotick (talk) 14:22, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not the Liz you're replying to but the key issue that's causing concern is a lack of reliable, independent sources to indicate sustained coverage over time. See WP:BLPRS and WP:NRV. Nobody here is saying that her work isn't important, only that we're unable to find sufficient independent news coverage to prove it. Any arguments here need to be made based on both policy and the evidence to back it. Lizthegrey (talk) 20:03, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Snowflake (software). Cullen328 (talk) 00:16, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Snowflake (software). I cannot find any significant, independent coverage about this subject. Fails WP:GNG. Subject is stated as a "pianist" and a "technologist". But fails subject-specific notability guideliens for both WP:NBIO and WP:NMUSIC. --WikiLinuz {talk} 🍁 02:41, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  What's your opinion on the sources I linked above regarding SIGCOV? I'm aware the article is lacking sources and needs additional sourcing added, but I have some leads on that sourcing... Lizthegrey (talk) 03:01, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @WikiLinuz @Cullen328 @Oaktree b as per relist note below, there are some questions as to whether additional sourcing that's been found is sufficient to meet WP:GNG. You've not commented since the sources were added, can you please note if your opinion is still the same or whether it's changed following a re-read? Cheers. Lizthegrey (talk) 21:42, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  There are specific for subject-specific notability (please see the links), so rudimentary GNG wouldn't be sufficient (given this article requires SSN). --WikiLinuz {talk} 🍁 05:31, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @WikiLinuz: I'm not sure I follow your argument about subject-specific notability for NBIO as a technologist, but concede the argument for NMUSIC (and thus why I noted above that I think (musician) is the wrong disambiguation category). I see People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject, see also WP:GNG from WP:BASIC, and A person who does not meet these additional criteria may still be notable under Wikipedia:Notability from WP:BIO#Additional criteria. If we choose to take the most specific criterion, say, WP:CREATIVE, then The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique should apply since she is the author of Snowflake. Which criterion do you think should be applied here and what do you think is missing for meeting that criterion? Lizthegrey (talk) 05:46, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria, which says:

  People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.

  • If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability.

  1. Millstein, Lincoln (2023-01-17). "Self-taught musician Serene to perform at New Canaan's Grace Farms". CT Insider. Hearst Communications. Archived from the original on 2023-02-28. Retrieved 2023-02-28.

     The article notes: "Serene’s first claim to fame was as a renowned computer scientist and hacker who in 2016 created Snowflake, an open-source software project to circumvent internet censorship. ... Like coding, her music was largely self-taught. She started playing the piano at age 5. She attended Carnegie Mellon University and got her computer science degree in three years and went to work for Google. She earned enough to buy her first piano - a Steinway Model O. She left Google and started her professional music career only five years ago, with two of those interrupted by the pandemic. ... Serene’s collaborations include her role as composer for Kanye West’s Opera, premiered at Lincoln Center & Art Basel, as well as pianist and technologist with Blue Man Group’s founder, bringing futuristic innovations at the intersection of music and technology while also highlighting her own audiovisual synesthesia."

  2. Hitt, Elinor (2020-05-15). "Staff Picks: Costa, Candles, and California". The Paris Review. Archived from the original on 2023-02-28. Retrieved 2023-02-28.

     The review notes: "On Sunday night, the pianist Serene sat before her instrument in a dimly lit room, ready to perform the most recent installment of Fever’s Candlelight Concert series online. ... After opening with Ravel and Chopin, Serene performed the aria from the Goldberg Variations. She worked the keys with an Apollonian restraint, her two hands playing together as if in casual conversation. A pairing of sonatas by Beethoven followed—op. 31, no. 8, “Pathétique,” composed early in his career, and op. 111, no. 32, ... Serene urged that we consider Beethoven a master of improvisation—a designation not commonly given to classical composers. But she drove the point home with swinging tempos and athletic trills, positing Beethoven as a classical antecedent to jazz. Then came Liszt and Gershwin, and the concert concluded with a heartening round of “Rhapsody in Blue.” ... Unsurprisingly, Serene performed a spectacle to match. Watching Serene play is like watching Jackson Pollock paint; she lifts her hands high and strikes the keys with intention, producing an ordered and harmonious spattering of notes. Her next performance with Fever will be streaming on May 24."

  3. Newman, Jared (2023-02-08). "Snowstorm is a censorship-blocking VPN that might actually work". Fast Company. Archived from the original on 2023-02-28. Retrieved 2023-02-28.

     The article notes: "... says Serene, Snowstorm’s lead developer. (She only goes by her first name for security reasons.) ... Serene hadn’t expected to be spending this much time building upon Snowflake. After releasing the original prototype early 2016 as part of a fellowship with the Open Technology Fund, she left the technology world to focus on working as a concert pianist. ... To that end, Serene is trying to build a business around Snowstorm, raising $1 million from 1517 Fund, Tyler Cowen of Emergent Ventures, and a group of private angel investors."

  There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Serene to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".

  Cunard (talk) 08:35, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think number 3 is really "sigcov." as it only mentions Serene in passing when referencing Snowstorm. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 18:41, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria says, "If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability."

I consider sources one and two to be substantial, while source three is not but can be combined with the other two sources to help demonstrate notability. Cunard (talk) 09:15, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Allowing more time to discuss the presented sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:35, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Snowflake (software) per reasons stated by WikiLinuz. Notable creation, but not enough SIGCOV of creator to establish notablity. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 18:39, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment There's another source that just came out that I think focuses more on Serene's life story and how she came to create Snowflake/Snowstorm rather than on Snowstorm itself. TechRadar (TechRadar), which RSN has a positive opinion on. Does that new story address the concern over sigcov? Lizthegrey (talk) 21:27, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is a very good find. On 28 February 2023, I made the last comment in the AfD the second relist. The TechRadar article published on 1 March 2023 is a strong source that provides detailed biographical background about Serene. The article notes: "That’s not what the mononymic Serene thinks, both a professional concert pianist and security software developer who has eschewed her family name to protect her privacy. ... Snowstorm is the evolution of Snowflake, software that Serene developed seven years ago together with Arlo Breault and David Fifield ... Serene started to get familiar with WebRTC technology while she was working for Google. Starting at an early age, she quickly became the first engineer at Google Ideas (now Jigsaw), a dedicated team focused on developing tech solutions to support people around the world in their fight against cyberattacks, censorship and privacy breaches. ... She then decided to leave the Big Tech giant for being able to focus on open-source software, while cultivating her career as a professional musician. ... Serene has also launched a homonymous company and managed to raise $1 million so far, just enough to support a small team of developers."

    In combination with the other sources listed above, Serene clearly meets Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria, which says, "multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability".

    Cunard (talk) 09:15, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep in light of sources highlighted by Cunard and Lizthegrey which easily satisfy WP:BASIC. My initial concern was that this is a WP:BLP and that we should respect the subject's own wishes to protect her privacy (and thus simply redirect to the software page). However, there is sufficient coverage in secondary sources to suggest that she is comfortable with a certain amount of public attention. Also, the information about her musical career does not belong on the Snowflake (software) page. Cielquiparle (talk) 12:58, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Without the Tech Radar source, it was still delete. With it, we're at !keep. Oaktree b (talk) 22:02, 4 March 2023 (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.