Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michelle Ye Hee Lee

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 keep. This is a close call, but I believe there is enough consensus to suggest the article should be improved and not deleted Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:46, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Michelle Ye Hee Lee

[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Michelle Ye Hee Lee (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)

Fails WP:BIO and WP:GNG. All of the refs are either pieces written by the journalist herself or in one case, an interview, and another one being a blog. A WP:BEFORE search did not yield significant independent sources about the journalist. SD0001 (talk) 14:35, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. SD0001 (talk) 14:35, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 14:49, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Per either GNG or NPOL. (Striking, not cutting outright, because I think an official of a major trade organization qualifies for a presumption of notability analogous to that we give politicians.) She's the president of the Asian American Journalists Association ([1]). AleatoryPonderings (talk) 14:51, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep perhaps WP:ANYBIO I cannot see much notable about the subject, and many of the references seem like PR and trivial mention. Yet she is apparently the president of what is perhaps an obscure non-profit Asian American Journalists Association (AAJA). Her claim to notability is perhaps being reporter who is Asian. If we decide to merge or redirect I suggest the target of AAJA Lightburst (talk) 15:43, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I suggest in maintaining this article. She is notable because she is the head of the AAJA. AAJA is well known organisation that that represents Asian Americans in mainstream media and many of the journalists who have articles in Wikipedia are members of AAJA. There are also other journalists who are also in her level that also have an article in Wikipedia, but don't have much details regarding their careers in their pages. Regarding the sources, there are many other journalists who have their information from their own sources. If its possible, we could try editing the article by adding outside sources, rather than her own sources. So, I suggest in maintaining this article rather than deleting it. Toadboy123 (talk) 16:06, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, on the basis that she is the president of a notable organisation, and has received enough attention as a journalist (there are a couple of decent interviews). I have added one ref and an external link. Tacyarg (talk) 17:56, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete* - per nominator, largely reads like a resume and almost nothing independently notable. Even AAJA reads more of a press release than an org of substantial converge. Evaders99 (talk) 20:30, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I can see your points here. it was weak enough that I may change my mind about a weak keep. Lightburst (talk) 21:14, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I am puzzled by the suggestion that the Asian American Journalists Association is obscure or non-notable. It is a large organization that has been around since 1981 and has been the subject of at least one encyclopedia entry ([2], in a book published by Routledge; see also [3]). It was also cited by the United States Commission on Civil Rights ([4]). I realize that notability is not inherited, but I think we need some perspective on how significant it is to be named the head of this association. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 21:28, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Probably not enough to satisfy ANYBIO on its own, but she was a Pulitzer finalist (along with some colleagues) in 2014.[5] Google Scholar also finds quite a few citations of her journalism. pburka (talk) 22:04, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. She is the head of AAJA. It is not some obscure organisation. Its quite well-known among the American mainstream media and among the Asian American community. There are other journalists who don't have such positions and yet they have their own Wikipedia article. She is notable because she was a Pulitzer finalist (along with some colleagues) in 2014.[6] and also the head of AAJA. So, I suggest in maintaining the article than deleting it.Toadboy123 (talk) 09:12, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment THe only rationale for keeping that's being repeated here is that she is the President of AAJA. Being the president of an organization or a Pulitzer finalist only creates a likelihood of notability, it does not create notability by itself. The fact that the sources don't exist indicates it is not notable. As we are talking about an American living in the 21st century, no sources being available online pretty much means no sources exist at all. SD0001 (talk) 04:08, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fair enough, and I fully admit that I've been unable to come up with a biographical profile for Lee in secondary sources. But it is exceptionally rare for journalists—and, indeed, authors in general—to be the subject of sustained biographical coverage. (Not all notable journalists are Bob Woodwards, after all.) That's presumably why we have subject-specific guidelines in the first place: we recognize that authors and creative professionals can become notable for their contributions to a field without being the subject of sustained biographical coverage. I think being elected president of a major trade association is an indication that Lee has been recognized by her peers as a significant figure in her field. And, as pburka notes above, her journalism (in one of America's most respected newspapers) is widely cited (Scholar cite counts: [7]). I think these facts combine to establish notability. I may well be wrong about this, and others are free to WP:TROUT me if that's the case. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 04:35, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment There are plenty of journalists who have articles about them, but still not have achieved that much form of notability. Since, she is not only the president of AAJA, but also has much of our work recognized by her peers and other well known publications (her work is also used by other mainstream media). She is also interviewed or referenced as an expert when it comes to dealing with economics within the political campaigns in U.S. So, it is preferable to maintain her Wikipedia article.Toadboy123 (talk) 05:00, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Writes for the Washington Post, The Independent, Vox, IPR and Politico. Plenty of coverage. Passes WP:SIGCOV outwith the reportage. scope_creepTalk 10:21, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Since her works are used by other well known mainstream media and she is among the experts within the media coverage of U.S. politics, I think its suggestible to keep her article. Toadboy123 (talk) 03:00, 28 August 2020 (UTC) [reply]
  • Comment. So, is the discussion considered closed ? Should we maintain the article in Wikipedia after all ?? Toadboy123 (talk) 10:49, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Unfortunately she hasn't played for at least one minute in a national football league game; then she would be a slam dunk notable, but I think we can over look that. President of Asian American Journalists Association (AAJA), Pulitzer finalist, writes for the Washington Post, The Independent, Vox, IPR and Politico, I think we should presume she is notable.   // Timothy :: talk  05:37, 6 September 2020 (UTC)   // Timothy :: talk  05:37, 6 September 2020 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Michelle_Ye_Hee_Lee&oldid=977185044"