Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim Leffel

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. The sources in the article (and the ones provided in this discussion) do not seem to be convincing evidence of notability. Claims that Leffel has won the highest awards in his field are also not convincing. Consensus at this time seems clear that Leffel does not pass WP:GNG. The work that User:Ane wiki has done on this article is good, but unfortunately, no amount of good work can make someone notable when they aren't. ‑Scottywong| confess _ 01:45, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tim Leffel

[edit]
Tim Leffel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable. Lacks coverage about Leffel in independent reliable sources. Sourcing is by him, primary or short quotes from him. None have any depth of coverage about him. A search found nothing better and found no good reviews of his books. Looking at WorldCat shows his most held book is at 191 libraries, a figure which from what I've read is small. There is lots of awards listed but none are major awards. duffbeerforme (talk) 10:55, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Chris Troutman (talk) 11:13, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Another voice to Delete. He has a paid editor working for him, User:Ane wiki - she disclosed, which is to be appreciated -- and I've given her a lot of directions on where she could look for evidence of notability. I don't think there's anything to be found, TBH, and the whole history of the page indicates extensive self-editing and sock-puppetry.AdventurousMe (talk) 12:20, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. This is an odd target for deletion. The subject has repeatedly won the largest awards in travel writing today[1], has written for the biggest and most respected travel writing and journalism outlets[2], has multiple published books[3], and speaks at the largest conferences in travel[4]. This is a clear expert in the field, and a valuable entry for those looking to learn more. Page can be improved, but should not be deleted.--Andyopteris (talk) 17:12, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:22, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:22, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've been editing pages on here for the past 4 years User:AdventurousMe. Feel free to disagree with my assessment, but please don't accuse me of sockpuppetry without doing the slightest research and looking at my contribs page. Lack of a Wikipedia entry does not indicate lack of significance: absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, and our dear Wikipedia is far from comprehensive. Many of the most prestigious awards are self-nominated and then judged—no one would say that process, nor the number of awards, somehow makes the Cannes Lions less prestigious. My main point here is that a simple cleanup with better sources would improve this page, but little is served by its deletion.--Andyopteris (talk) 03:45, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Huge apologies, User:Andyopteris. I clicked the wrong contributions page, which pulled up only your contribution to that page. I'd agree that if better sources can be found, the page should be kept - but better sources have not been produced as yet. At the moment, like your own Wikipedia page, which I note has also been deleted, he's failing WP:AUTHOR because of primary sources and lack of depth of coverage. If anyone can provide strong sources - and the subject has a paid editor working for him looking for them -- then it would move to a keep. I'd suggest, if you're arguing to keep, that you find reliable secondary sources attesting to notability, and the relevance of the awards. AdventurousMe (talk) 03:59, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks User:AdventurousMe-I was all for deletion of the page about me (but oddly flattered that an editor that had previously worked on "baldness" and "erectile dysfunction" has also chosen me as a worthy topic). Anyhow, secondary sources shouldn't be difficult to find here, and I'll look into why SATW, NATJA, and TBEX don't have their own pages along the lines of British Guild of Travel Writers. My concern is that these standards as applied here would eliminate essentially all modern travel writers, which goes against the spirit if not the letter of the rule.--Andyopteris (talk) 17:31, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I can imagine User:Andyopteris! Mercifully, I'm in no danger of getting my own page. I guess the query here is in what form he's notable: because to me it seems as though he's not a notable journalist (50-odd articles on not particularly amazing outlets, and I'm sure he'd not hit the criteria over at the Journalism working project), and his books aren't particularly notable, certainly not by the standards applied to book authors in other sectors. Is he really *that* notable in the new media landscape - as a blogger? If so, I'd expect him to have some depth of coverage. It really doesn't help that he's been editing his own page, and there's several single-purpose accounts that have also worked on the page and that page only, and now has a paid editor working for him. He seems to me to be a reasonably successful working travel writer - not a super-star, a best-seller, someone who's transformed the landscape, or built a particularly significant body of work, but someone who's currently doing OK -- and not someone who'd have his own Wikipedia page in the normal scheme of things. I guess the concern here is that if for every industry we featured people who were doing relatively well, Wikipedia would be over-run with more-or-less obscure BLPs, and that's why the policy on depth of coverage in reliable sources exists. But I'd welcome clarification on this: on what, particularly, makes him notable. Do look into SATW, NATJA and TBEX as well. If you've got reliable secondary sources on them, they might well deserve their own articles. AdventurousMe (talk) 05:40, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Hi. Please, if this is not the place for this comment, let me know and I'll move to the talk page. I understand the points explained - very patiently - by AdventurousMe in the talk page, but.. what makes someone "notable" in the world of travel writers? There are individuals who make a great contribution to his profession but not to the point of having a direct mention in NY Times, and still are big influencers. The fact of being widely quoted, as is the case of TL, does not speak about his reputation? In fact, I'm not sure if we can apply the same standards of "notability" for a novelist, a journalist or a travel writer; every profession have a set of media who are authorities in the field, they may not have the significance of other media, but they are reliable media in the sector. When these other media will begin to be reliable for Wikipedia?. AdventurousMe said on the talk page: "US News saying TL won a NATJA award is a great secondary source, because it demonstrates that both the awards and TL are noteworthy, and is secondary, not primary. NATJA saying TL won an award is primary and, frankly, fairly trivial".. NATJA is the highest award you can receive as a travel writer, but only exists if it appears in US News?. I have introduced new links in the article.--Ane wiki (talk) 22:03, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, but with expansion. As mentioned by Andyopteris above, the subject has been the recipient of a significant award or honor in his field,[5] which would seem to meet Criterion 1 of WP:ANYBIO. Furthermore, citations in US News, USA Today Travel, CBS News, Reuters, Travel + Leisure and Newsweek indicate that he has created a collective body of work, that has been the subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews (Criterion 3 of WP:AUTHOR), or, when journalism awards are considered alongside the citations, "regarded as an important figure by peers" (Criterion 1 of WP:AUTHOR). That said, the above mentioned citations ought to be expanded or paraphrased in the article text, rather than just listed. Nmillerche (talk) 23:51, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I'd be more persuaded that these awards were significant if anyone could provide a secondary source to them: they're open only to members of a specific organisation, they give out 80 a year to around 1500 entrants, and I can't find any secondary sources testifying to their relevance, and none has yet been cited here. Whereas if I Google Thomas Cook Travel Book Awards, or Dolman Travel Book Awards, I pull up a tonne of reliable secondary sources as to who's won. That shows that the Thomas Cook Travel Book Awards are notable, the Dolman Travel Book Awards are notable, and it suggests that these SATW awards are not the highest awards in travel writing, or they'd get more coverage.

I also think there's a significant difference between being asked to quote for an article on what luggage to buy - the US News piece, which interviewed four people on luggage - and being the *subject* of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews. These aren't making him the subject of their pieces. They're pieces about something else which cite the person. Newspapers do grab a lot of quotes from people: it's how they operate. If there was a piece that, for example, testified to his date of birth and education, as you'd expect in a piece that had him as the subject, that would be evidence of notability. If there were multiple reviews of his books in reliable secondary sources, again, that would lean towards a keep.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by AdventurousMe (talk • contribs) 02:26, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There are many more quotes of TL in major media, which I did not include in the article.--Ane wiki (talk) 00:08, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment SATW awards have good coverage in reliable media, I just uploaded the list on the talk page. And something more: going to the extreme, reality TV participants are more likely to be considered "notable" than an author with books in print because reliable media have talked about them and their lives, even though they haven't done anything notable? I know it does not work that way, but with an example taken to the extreme, we can think if the "notability" criteria may not be as dependent on the media coverage, and more dependent of the subject´s history.--Ane wiki (talk) 04:29, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I'm glad we've given up the idea that these are the single most important awards in travel writing. If you can find a reliable secondary source saying that he's won one of the awards that are listed, that would really help support the idea that he is himself notable. As a paid editor, User:Ane Wiki I don't think this is the place to argue for overturning WP:AUTHOR and WP:V because the man who is paying you to argue his case doesn't seem to fit: there are all sorts of reliable niche sources for writers which cover writers extensively (New York Review of Books, Creative Review, Publishers Weekly, Library Journal, etc) while a myriad mainstream publications run book reviews, travel book round-ups, books of the year, their own book awards, their own blog awards, etc.etc. Genuinely notable authors are not short of reliable coverage, though they may not attract the volume of coverage that celebrities do. AdventurousMe (talk) 05:24, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment AdventurousMe if you see - through the links - that the SATW award is important, and if TL appears in the official website of the award as a winner, what other evidence is needed? And something about me as a paid editor: the subject of the article paid me for adapt this article to Wikipedia standards; and if I took the job is because I thought there was significant coverage in reliable media to meet the requirements, obviously, for a traveler writer. You mention the "New York Review of Books," but in my opinion, you are equating travel writers with traditional writers, and they can not be handled with the same standards. I also think that we should be commenting this on the talk page, but I wanted to expose my opinion here.--Ane wiki (talk) 16:28, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment User:Ane Wiki the article is tagged for primary sources and notability. Using reliable secondary sources, with good depth of coverage, is key to establishing notability in BLPs. This is why the nomination for deletion says: "Not notable. Lacks coverage about Leffel in independent reliable sources. Sourcing is by him, primary or short quotes from him. None have any depth of coverage about him." So that's what you need to find: independent, reliable, secondary sources with a good depth of coverage. If someone notable wins a notable award, that should be reported somewhere that's not the awards website. If someone's notable, there'll be profiles on reliable sources covering their early life. That's what you should be looking for. If you've found this significant coverage of him in reliable media, please do add it to the article. AdventurousMe (talk) 02:41, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
On a few comments.
"The subject has repeatedly won the largest awards in travel writing today". The link supplied does not show this. It shows a single year, nothing repeating. It also shows he did not win the largest award, that was won by Mary Jo McConahay. Also above Leffel in the main category was Genevieve Shaw Brown, Kerri Westenberg, Ellen Creager and Jill Schensul. SATW awards may claim to be the "premier competition" but does anyone independent back this up.
SATW awards are a pay for play award with a maximum prize of $1,500. Not a major awards. The large number they give out also dilutes the significance of individual category awards.
These awards, or the NAJTA awards may be up in the heirachy of awards specifically targeted at North American travel writers (a subset of writers is one region) but they are not the highest awards available to travel writers. They are eligible to win open writing awards.
The SATW award coverage shown at Talk:Tim Leffel is very underwhelming. Short blogs promoting a few of the winners and some listings. Not enogh to make the awards themself notable, even less so for someone not mentioned in any of these sources
Nmillerche claims Leffel's work "has been the subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews". Where are these articles or reviews.
"you are equating travel writers with traditional writers, and they can not be handled with the same standards." They are handled with the same standards. Travel writers are not given special treatment. duffbeerforme (talk) 12:03, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly. AdventurousMe (talk) 02:38, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment "The subject has repeatedly won the largest awards in travel writing today" refers not only to the SATW, as shown in the article. And in that link we can see that Leffel won one of the categories of Lowell Thomas award.
And when I say "you are equating travel writers with traditional writers, and they can not be handled with the same standards" I'm not asking for special treatment. I am indicating that travel writers do not get the same treatment in the major media, and that it should be taken into account.. With very few exceptions, the most important traveler writers only have extensive coverage in online media and pages that started as self published and now have a remarkable reputation within the genre. That's what I mean: travel writers will never have an award like the Pulitzer, and perhaps the USA Today will never make them an interview. So it seems that in regard to travel writers, no award is important, no website is important just because they are not mentioned in major media, that generally do not deal with travel writers; they only quote them in some articles - as in the case of Leffel. So in this context, the quotes do not matter? I know that every day hundreds of writers are quoted in hundreds of articles and they don´t deserve an article in Wikipedia. But if you have quotes, work, books, awards, that should make a difference.--Ane wiki (talk) 19:48, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That's simply not the case. Travel writers can win the Feature Article section of the Pulitzer, or any of a myriad notable, established book and journalism awards, not to mention scholarships, fellowships, etc: they can be the subject of profiles and articles, cf Jan Morris, Bruce Chatwin, Paul Theroux. There are all sorts of niche awards for industry writers in one country: that doesn't make people who've won them notable, otherwise we'd be submitting everyone who's won (eg) a tech journalism award for Australia & New Zealand, or a Sports Writing awards for the UK. Self-published books, which these appear to be, don't carry significant weight unless they're the rare breakthrough self-published success that attracts significant coverage and hits bestseller lists. You've so far failed to demonstrate WP:AUTHOR: there's still not one secondary source listed. Please stop arguing for special treatment on the grounds that he's a travel writer: he needs to hit the same standards as any other creative in any sector. Or, if you do think travel writers should be treated differently, and you have a reasoned argument for this, take it up on the discussion pages for the relevant community standards. Please disclose your affiliation first, though. AdventurousMe (talk) 02:37, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Every genre has his own awards. Being at the top of your field means being recognized by these genre awards as you are being compared to others writing in the same genre. You tell me that the top writers of each genre does not deserve to be in Wikipedia, unless they win the Feature Article section of the Pulitzer or a general award. As we commented on talk page, with these standards, almost no travel writer (or other genre writer) is going to be "notable" and admins will have to check 200 travel writers pages.--Ane wiki (talk) 20:23, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You're wilfully misunderstanding. If you want to rewrite Wikipedia's community standards to include your client, I suggest you go to the relevant pages and discuss the issue on the talkboard there, disclosing first: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(people) And, yes, very few travel writers are notable.AdventurousMe (talk) 05:16, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I´m not trying to rewrite the rules. Simply, I think that in addition to the awards - discussed or not - and the notability - or not - of the people who write about TL, dozens of mentions and quotes in various articles on reliable media could indicate that an author is notable, even though these articles are not about him. And these are not only quotes of Leffel´s books, they also talk about him - whether they are short commentaries, they´re signs that the writer is an authorized voice and a reference -. Then we can discuss, as we are doing, if is applicable, but please do not say that I am wilfully misunderstanding.--Ane wiki (talk) 19:51, 31 July 2014 (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.
  1. ^ "SATW Awards". SATW Awards. Retrieved 26 July 2014.
  2. ^ "Contently - Tim Leffel portfolio". Contently. Retrieved 26 July 2014.
  3. ^ "Amazon Author page - Tim Leffel". Amazon. Retrieved 26 July 2014.
  4. ^ "TBEX Speakers". TBEX Conference. Retrieved 26 July 2014.
  5. ^ "SATW Awards". SATW Awards. Retrieved 26 July 2014.
  6. ^ http://www.timleffel.com/travelbooks.htm
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Tim_Leffel&oldid=1070372550"