Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2021 November 5

Neal Ludevig (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore)

The article in reference that was deleted was done so more than a year ago. Since then, substantially new materials about the subject in question has emerged - presence in major media, podcasts, and interviews detailing this persons credibility. The primary argument here for the original post was that there was a lack of individual press of the individual, of which since then there has been numerous, detailing this individual's role in major international events. It would seem that given that the article has been substantially rewritten, and new press and media are now available this person, it would merit an article being available on them. Hiztorybuph (talk) 23:41, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Neal Ludevig was G4-ed 13:34, 5 November 2021 by User:Explicit SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:46, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Hiztorybuph, if there is something new, link for us. Read the advice at WP:THREE. Not that podcasts and interviews are likely to be worthless for demonstrating Wikipedia-notability. User:Hiztorybuph SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:49, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, SmokeyJoe. Why are podcasts and radio shows not eligible? It seems like a show, like "All of it", with major artists and performers, has merit? Like this one that he's on! https://www.wnyc.org/story/black-woodstock-50

Some pieces that are new in the last year, showing him as a producer, include articles and coverage in: Nasdaq - https://thecenter.nasdaq.org/foe-neal-ludevig-moon31/ - a full interview KTVZ News - https://ktvz.com/videos/local-videos/2020/10/18/funeral-held-for-south-sister-glacier/ him as an activist in the sustainability space Live for Live Music - https://liveforlivemusic.com/news/revive-big-band-black-history-month-kickstarter/ - him as a producer (again) SF Film / Rainen Foundation - https://krfoundation.org/2021-filmmaking-grants-announced/ - him as a film producer Bright Shining Light - https://brightshininglight.com/s2-ep-37-pave-your-own-path-with-neal-ludevig/ - him being interviewed about entrepreneurship (again) As It Should Be interview - https://thamarrahjones.com/3-curating-experiences-that-create-systemic-change-with-neal-ludevig-he-him/ - him as an event producer and curator Side Hustle Divas - https://open.spotify.com/show/6K1uftYctBGR3uW11FcYlA - him as an entrepreneur Hey Summit - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obUPnvvYn4M - a major summit for entrepreneurs.

I feel like that's a solid amount, in addition to all of his other press from the Black Woodstock anniversary (similar to like a Pete Shapiro, who was known for the anniversary tour of the Grateful Dead). This guy is along the same track - a film producer, promoter, presenter, curator, producer. He has years under his belt from harlem Arts Festival, plus the Black Woodstock, and a number of other programs he's done. I didn't know how to go back into the original discussion, but this certainly feels merited. With these, plus the older articles, it seems like it should certainly be up for discussion again, no?

Hiztorybuph (talk) 01:21, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Hiztorybuph, podcasts and radio shows are useless for arguing that the subject should get a page, because these are not independent of the subject. Read WP:GNG. Read WP:THREE, and note that if you show no signs of having read these things, and toss up a large number of not good things, few of us will even read them, as you are wasting our time. SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:17, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Red links (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore)

The RFD was closed as delete in January 2011 probably mainly because Red link was salted but in September 2011 a DAB was created there, see Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 September 22. The Red–black tree mentions "red links" and the Red Sex Link entry seems to be countable as well meaning there are at least 2 encyclopedic meanings. The 1st and last entries seem to be proper nouns and thus aren't relevant to the plural. Should Red links be unsalted and redirected to Red link as a {{R from plural}} or should it be left red? Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:17, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Unsalt and redirect per nom. Thryduulf (talk) 20:42, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• No change We should maintain at least one of red link or red links as, well, a red link for example purposes indefinitely. Jclemens (talk) 23:41, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Red link example exists for that purpose, as do links like this one. Thryduulf (talk) 23:49, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Overturn salting per nom. — Alalch Emis (talk) 01:41, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Unsalt and redirect per nom, makes absolute sense that Red link and Red links should redirect to the same place. Hut 8.5 18:06, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes per WP:PLURALPT though as noted the proper nouns are probably not relevant. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:35, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]