Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Caleb Femi

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|Caleb Femi}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Caleb Femi}})

WP:BLP of a poet and filmmaker, not reliably sourced as having any credible claim to passing our notability standards for writers or filmmakers. The only notability claim on offer here is that his first book of poetry was published a few months ago, but as always writers are not automatically notable just because their books exist -- the notability test for a writer requires distinctions, such as notable literary awards and/or a significant, WP:GNG-worthy volume of critical attention being paid to their work by the media. And as a filmmaker, there's exactly no content about his film work here at all beyond the basic use of "filmmaker" as a job title in the introduction -- but notability for filmmakers works the same way as it does for writers, requiring awards and/or critical attention rather than being automatically clinched just because he has film credits. And when it comes to the sourcing, two of the three footnotes here are primary sources that are not support for notability at all -- and while the third is a real newspaper article, it takes more than just one of those to get a subject over GNG. As I'm not an expert in finding British media coverage below the free BBC/Guardian tier, I'm willing to withdraw this if somebody with better access to those resources can find enough quality sources to do better than this -- but as written, this isn't cutting it. Bearcat (talk) 14:00, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

:Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 14:00, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

:Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 14:00, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

:Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 14:00, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

:Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 14:00, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

• Keep I think I've found sufficient sources to pass GNG:

:* The Guardian source already in the article;

:* "[https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/nov/05/the-best-recent-poetry-review-roundup The best recent poetry – review roundup]", also from The Guardian, which devotes a paragraph to the book;

:* "[https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/oct/03/poet-caleb-femi-named-first-young-peoples-laureate-for-london Poet Caleb Femi named first young people's laureate for London]", also from The Guardian;

:* "[https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/observations/2020/10/caleb-femi-north-peckham-estate-police-poetry-teaching Caleb Femi: 'Poetry is the art of the people']" from New Statesman, a respected British news magazine;

:* "[https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/theatre-dance/features/caleb-femi-goldfish-bowl-poetry-play-battersea-arts-centre-young-poet-laureate-knife-crime-a8379056.html Poet Caleb Femi was shot and almost killed as a teenager. Now his new play reveals how reading Frankenstein gave him new life]", a profile/interview from The Independent, a (now online-only) broadsheet;

:* "[https://www.standard.co.uk/go/london/arts/young-poet-laureate-caleb-femi-my-generation-has-embraced-technology-were-not-waiting-for-a3448146.html Young Poet Laureate Caleb Femi: 'My generation has embraced technology - we're not waiting for publications anymore']", an article similar to the above from the Evening Standard, the primary London newspaper (now a freesheet, but with a long history and generally respected.

:Is that sufficient? (I'd add them to the article but I'm a bit short of time for mainspace editing atm.) YorkshireLad  ✿  ^(talk) 14:54, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

• Weak Delete Keep. The Guardian and Independent references are a good start, unlike many of the Author AfDs, at least this article has a reference to an article about the author and there are other references that could and should be added. My concern is that the author does not seem to meet any of criteria listed in WP:AUTHOR. It might be too soon in the author's career for them to have impact. I would be fine with a keep and see if this is a case of WP:SINGLEEVENT. Cxbrx (talk) 15:59, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
• :{{u|Cxbrx}}, Failing to meet WP:AUTHOR explicitly isn't a reason to delete if the GNG is met: per WP:BASIC, {{tq|People who meet the basic criteria may be considered notable without meeting the additional criteria below.}} YorkshireLad  ✿  ^(talk) 16:36, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

:::{{u|YorkshireLad}}: Fair enough, I've changed to a weak keep. Multiple independent sources are what convinced me. The subject is not yet notable as an author though. Cxbrx (talk) 17:12, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

• Keep, definitely. At least three references YorkshireLad gives are strong enough.[https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/oct/03/poet-caleb-femi-named-first-young-peoples-laureate-for-london][https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/observations/2020/10/caleb-femi-north-peckham-estate-police-poetry-teaching][https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/theatre-dance/features/caleb-femi-goldfish-bowl-poetry-play-battersea-arts-centre-young-poet-laureate-knife-crime-a8379056.html] The interviews sections included are comparatively incidental to the editorial content. Verification (but maybe not notability) that he is a filmmaker is available.[https://www.bfi.org.uk/interviews/who-we-are-five-minutes-with-caleb-femi][https://www.somersethouse.org.uk/blog/get-stand-now-qa-poet-and-director-caleb-femi][https://www.huckmag.com/art-and-culture/film-2/the-poet-helping-the-next-generation-shape-the-future-caleb-femi/] The BBC thinks his opinions are worth giving and putting him on the radio.[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-53082188][https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p08htbdd][https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p08wnr5w] All are for me in the UK free to access. Thincat (talk) 19:27, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.