Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 July 19

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

Media Organisations Biography Society Web Games Science Arts Places Indiscern. Not-Sorted

< July 18	July 20 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 07:48, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

K-rupt

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't meet WP:NMUSICBIO as search turns up barely two pages of local coverage of his death with next to nothing about his music. No notable discography, chart activity or awards over the course of his brief career. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 05:50, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Africa. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 05:50, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kenya-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:31, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: basically no coverage apart from his death, which is not enough for reliability, although will probably change my vote if the claims for a single being charted can be sourced. — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 17:16, 19 July 2024 (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.

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. ✗plicit 10:38, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concept Medical

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article is a WP:PROMO Fails to meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for corporations, as explained in WP:NCORP, WP:ORGCRIT. Fails WP:RSP. Sponsored content published at supplements (WP:NEWSORGINDIA). Renomination reason: sock puppet activity in the prior AfD discussion, also six months have passed since the last AfD. Charlie (talk) 04:06, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Medicine, Technology, India, and Florida. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:47, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: A Florida company, with an article sourced to Indian news sources, seems a bit odd... They exist, but there is no coverage of them we'd use, that isn't PR-ish. Oaktree b (talk) 21:08, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 05:45, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: WP:NCORP, also appears to violate WP:SOAPBOX. ADifferentMan (talk) 10:24, 19 July 2024 (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.

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 merge‎ to Randall Terry#2024 presidential candidacy. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:23, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Randall Terry 2024 presidential campaign

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No established notability. Additionally Broden, Terry, 2024 election subjects, and the Constitution Party all have their own articles that can handle what little notable content exists on this subject SecretName101 (talk) 03:43, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge: with the current piece on Randall Terry or related topics. Terry's campaign itself is not notable. Broader articles can cover the details of his 2024 run for president, so a standalone article for this campaign is not needed. Merging the content would keep all the information, put it in a better place, and keep the platform concise and focused.--AstridMitch (talk) 04:23, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd have definitely nominated it for a merge rather than deletion if there was any measure of content in the article.

But with the article at 2,614 bytes (a stub to end all stubs), merge vs. deletion is a difference without a distinction. SecretName101 (talk) 15:35, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and United States of America. CptViraj (talk) 04:53, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy merge Don't do this crap, just because the major candidates have separate pages for their campaigns doesn't mean any campaign needs its own article. Reywas92^Talk 14:12, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Randall Terry#2024 presidential candidacy per comments of SecretName101 and others. A standalone page is unwarranted per WP:NOPAGE. Sal2100 (talk) 16:46, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge as per the earlier comments. -Samoht27 (talk) 21:25, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: If we decide to delete this Article, Wikipedia could face bias allegations. Think about it: Joe Biden's Campaign had (before he stepped out of the race) an Article, Kamala Harris has one, Donald Trump has one, Jill Stein has one, Cornel West has one, RFK Jr., and so on. Is it fair to not have one for this campaign? No, it isn't. This campaign DOES have notability. Here's just one example of such coverage: https://www.politico.com/news/2024/04/27/constitution-party-randall-terry-election-2024-00154790. Currently, the Constitution Party is on the ballot in over 12 states. Why shouldn't it's Presidential candidate get an Article? - Avishai11 (talk) 23:31, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please see WP:OTHER and WP:NOPAGE. Sal2100 (talk) 19:16, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Randall Terry. Media outlets do not seem to consider his campaign especially notable. Just because someone makes the ballot doesn't automatically mean their campaign deserves a Wikipedia page. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 18:02, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Ignore the usual shrieking about bias. We cover what reliable sources cover. This page is useless, his 2024 "campaign" should be mentioned at his BLP, nothing more. Don't think a redirect is necessary as it is unlikely to be a common search term. AusLondonder (talk) 16:53, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge selectively into his article. I’m not swayed by allegations that we’d be accused of favoritism. It’s literally the top bad argument in AfD. Think of the children and no true Scotsman and all that are just another logical fallacy out of many. We’re a private charity, not a public benefit. As of now, there are no reliable sources; that includes Politico, which is just a fancy blog. Bearian (talk) 01:46, 26 July 2024 (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.

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 no consensus‎. Star Mississippi 17:07, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zaine Kennedy

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT. Almost all the sourcing is not third party but speedway related. LibStar (talk) 01:30, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Motorsport and Australia. LibStar (talk) 01:30, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:52, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The fact that the sources are related to the speedway does not make them non-independent. Per WP:GNG "Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by the article's subject or someone affiliated with it. These sources could be considered affiliated with him if, for example, he were their owner. I would add a few more secondary sources [1] [2] [3] Tau Corvi (talk) 22:01, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have set up a discussion here Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Speedway_related_sources. LibStar (talk) 23:48, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I saw the RSN discussion first, so I do not plan to vote, but to give my opinion from my limited perspective. Having taken a look at Scunthorpe Scorpions, which looks like two different teams on one article, I can count about five dozen riders that have articles. Of the "Notable riders," most of them use "speedway related sources" in their articles with British Speedway cited between two and three dozen times. (More problematic, but farther outside of the discussion is that at least one article is citing sources that are MREL and GUNREL.)

Overall, the issue over the specific sources is going to have an effect on other articles. If deemed a problem, then there will need to be more AfD discussions in the near future; while if deemed acceptable could lead to additional article creations. I am of the opinion that redirects to the team articles could be more preferred than deletion and that some information might be includable in the various team articles. That said, I am unsure if the sources are a problem on these rider articles. --Super Goku V (talk) 06:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 02:31, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per suggestions by C679. SpacedFarmer (talk) 20:49, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – Minimal significant coverage, no real claim of notability. 5225_C (talk • contributions) 08:09, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: This BLP lacks the needed WP:SIGCOV to meet the WP:GNG. Let'srun (talk) 16:32, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It would be helpful to get an actual assessment of sources brought up in this discussion rather than general statements about the article lacking sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:15, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2 of the 3 sources brought up are not independent as discussed in reliable sources. The article subject still fails WP:SPORTSCRIT and WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 01:35, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Found some independent sources about this rider which deal with an under-21 world championship [4], Australian national youth championships [5] and even club championship in Australia [6]. There are more but I didn't go into much detail with the search. C 679 04:01, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Glasgow times article seems run of the mill, speedway riders crash all the time. I wouldn't regard fullnoise.com.au [7] as an independent source. LibStar (talk) 04:16, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's your opinion, I am just stating that there is independent coverage of this person out there, which you cited as the main issue with the page at the outset. C 679 05:29, 30 July 2024 (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.

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 no consensus‎. Sources presented after the second relist suggest a better-attended AfD would have likely resulted in a Keep, but I see no point in extending this, if deletion is off the table. Owen× ☎ 12:41, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

International Franchise Association

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article was previously deleted in 2013 after an AfD. Recreated in 2020. I don't see any reason to dispute the result of that AfD; there is still little in-depth coverage cited on this page. Outside of the Supreme Court case (which appears to have been sparsely covered), the only coverage is a few mentions from minor trade publications. I tried looking for more on Google, but all I could find were press releases. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 02:13, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: In-depth coverage from independent and reliable sources is needed to meet WP:GNG. Its small role in a Supreme Court case does not make it notable.--AstridMitch (talk) 04:48, 19 July 2024 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE. ✗plicit 13:20, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note to closer: see concerns at ANI that the AFD !votes by AstridMitch, now blocked, are LLM-aided. Abecedare (talk) 20:21, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Washington, D.C.. CptViraj (talk) 04:55, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:06, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law and Politics. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:07, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:05, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:13, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There's actually quite a bit of WP:SIGCOV in WP:SIRS for this organization, which has received news coverage for its activity on many issues, including local minimum wage mandates (NBC News, CBS News, Entrepreneur, Reuters), joint employer laws/regulation (NYTimes, Wall St. Journal, Entrepreneur, home health aide employment (NYT ed board), IFA's data partnership with the Census Bureau (NBER) -- plus academic articles in Enterprise and Society and Competitiveness Review, and items in the Business Journals and BisNow. Altogether, I see a pass of WP:NORG that didn't exist at the time of the last AfD. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:43, 2 August 2024 (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.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:26, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brock Berryhill

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Found no coverage of the artist beyond the one MusicRow article already present. Passing mentions for credits on notable musicians' songs does not make notability here. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 02:11, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 02:11, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Florida and Tennessee. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:08, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:11, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:06, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I found this audio-only interview with New England radio station WROR, but even then it's not enough for notability. Jalen Folf (Bark[s]) 11:47, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Does not meet GNG criteria and not enough RS coverage. Go4thProsper (talk) 16:24, 3 August 2024 (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.

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 redirect‎ to List of programs broadcast by ARY Digital#Drama. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:10, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Burns Road Kay Romeo Juliet

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Neutral nomination. Bringing here for consensus after disputed draftification and re-creation at Burns Road Kay Romeo Juliet (2024) by a number of socks. Not alleging libra is a sock, but this needs resolution in one direction or the other as the current situation is not sustainable. Star Mississippi 01:41, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Pakistan. Star Mississippi 01:41, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I will withhold my vote for now, until I make sure if it meets the GNG or not. But it's worth noting that the article on this topic has been created multiple times by socks of our prolific WP:PE Nauman335 and if this is also a case of UPE, it would be a clear violation of WP:TOU. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 08:52, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List_of_programs_broadcast_by_ARY_Digital#Drama: for now, as a compromise; but opposed to deletion given coverage on production; bylined review: [8]. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:26, 19 July 2024 (UTC) or Keep given the other bylined review in a notable media, added recently with other sources.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:27, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes Redirection make sense, to me as well. By the way, do I need to reiterate that youlinmagazine is not a RS and should not be used to meet the GNG. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 10:35, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  You can reiterate what you wish, but there is absolutely no consensus on Youlin not being reliable and it can be used on the target page as a relatively independent bylined (:D) source for verification about the content of the program, in the present case. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:49, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  So what if there's no consensus for Youlin yet? Sometimes one should Ignore all rules and use WP:COMMONSENSE because WP:CONTEXTMATTERS. And indeed it can be used on the target page as a relatively independent bylined Who said one can't use it? However, I mentioned that one cannot use it to justify GNG, especially since the author of this review piece is a guest contributor with merely two published articles under their by-line. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 13:37, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List_of_programs_broadcast_by_ARY_Digital#Drama although it received coverage but being a creator of this article, i dont want to entertain socks as the page is badly infected by socks just after its creation. Libraa2019 (talk) 12:54, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to, List_of_programs_broadcast_by_ARY_Digital#Drama as topic on lack it's notability and cited sources clearly not yet shown the notability to standa_lone.223.123.11.155 (talk) 19:34, 20 July 2024 (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.

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 merge‎ to Pilish. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:08, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cadae

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Another incredibly niche subgenre of poetry, actually I can't really see the difference between this and Pilish, which I have also nominated for deletion. The sources do not seem to be significant coverage from reliable sources. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 00:20, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Poetry and Mathematics. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 00:20, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge the first two sentences into Pilish as another example of pi-constrained writing; I can't find refs for cadae as a form beyond those already given. Adam Sampson (talk) 02:49, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unlike the fib (another mathematics-inspired form of poetry), the cadae seem to have little notability outside of being examples for Pilish, so I think merging there (or, should that end up being merged, Piphilology) is fine. Certainly the term should not be a red link. —Kusma (talk) 08:08, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge: cadae seems to be merely an example of pilish, and has near to none specific coverage. — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 17:10, 19 July 2024 (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.

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 speedy keep‎. Nominator withdrew and the redirect vote was striked out. (non-admin closure) C F A 💬 23:03, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lisa Henson

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:SIGCOV. The sources utilized all lack independence from the subject. 4meter4 (talk) 00:05, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and United States of America. CptViraj (talk) 04:56, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, Television, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:09, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to The Jim Henson Company -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:28, 19 July 2024 (UTC) [reply]
Keep - I have added a number of news articles covering Henson. These include coverage of her being named president of The Harvard Lampoon, work at Warner Bros., and Columbia Pictures.^[1]^[2]^[3] The articles date back to 1982, and are an indication of significant coverage that spans multiple years, well before she became CEO of the Jim Henson Company. DaffodilOcean (talk) 12:17, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The three New York Times sources added by DaffodilOcean clearly provided enough SIGCOV on the subject person and satisfied GNG, not to mention her numerous executive producer roles which should fulfill WP:CREATIVE. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 13:19, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Clear meets SIGCOV. pburka (talk) 13:21, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I would withdraw but we have a vote for a redirect. I support keeping the article based on the excellent sourcing improvements made to the article. Thanks to all who worked on it. Best.4meter4 (talk) 14:15, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Klemesrud, Judy (1982-05-16). "AT HARVARD, SHE RULES LAMPOONLAND". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2024-07-19.
^ Sims, Calvin (1993-08-10). "COMPANY NEWS; Columbia Pictures Selects A President for Production". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2024-07-19.
^ Weinraub, Bernard (1994-04-04). "She's Young and Smart, But Not Too Smart to Lead". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2024-07-19.

Keep: Since nomination, many reliable sources have been added to the article. — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 17:02, 19 July 2024 (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.

[:1-1] Klemesrud, Judy (1982-05-16). "AT HARVARD, SHE RULES LAMPOONLAND". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2024-07-19.

[:2-2] Sims, Calvin (1993-08-10). "COMPANY NEWS; Columbia Pictures Selects A President for Production". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2024-07-19.

[3] Weinraub, Bernard (1994-04-04). "She's Young and Smart, But Not Too Smart to Lead". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2024-07-19.

[1]

[2]

[3]