This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Maryland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Maryland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MarylandWikipedia:WikiProject MarylandTemplate:WikiProject MarylandMaryland articles
MurielMary, I am under the impression that per WP:AUTHOR criteria 3 and 4, Greenspan is notable and the draft should not have been rejected:
(3): The person has created... a significant or well-known work... In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of... or multiple independent periodical articles or reviews. (plenty of reviews in both books)
(4): The person's work (or works) has: (a) become a significant monument, (b) been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) won significant critical attention, or (d) been represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums. (both books won "significant critical attention")
I would like this to be re-evaluated if possible or please let me know what else I can do to improve the article - thank you. Fergyman (talk) 14:51, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The draft has NOT been rejected, it has been declined, you need to add more in-depth coverage of her to establish notability, a few book reviews doesn't really doesn't amount to "significant critical attention". Theroadislong (talk) 15:00, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Theroadislong: Could you link to some policy to justify your statement. From my understanding, you are wrong, she passes notability by both criteria three and four above. And your refutation, in which you state your opinion that the reviews don't justify "significant critical attention" (which doesn't really even make sense), only covers criteria four, there are no objections to be made on criteria three. She is notable and the draft should not be rejected unless you know of some policy we are missing. I had asked others about this before and they were on board. WP:Women in Red and User:David Eppstein everyone agreed that she is notable prior to any draft being made. Footlessmouse (talk) 21:22, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
