Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maurita Murphy Mead

Maurita Murphy Mead

No material secondary sources on the subject of this article. News hits are limited to the most local variety of coverage. Full professors are often, but not automatically, notable. Notable professors would have considerably more coverage.

If there are reliable, independent sources that provide significant coverage of the subject, please provide. Note that this Wikipedia article as been tagged for lacking sources for nearly four months. Bongomatic 10:22, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. All I could come up with to verify notability from the one valid assertion in the article were news releases from the university where she teaches and Wikipedia mirrors. No prejudice against recreation should she later gain some notoriety outside academia. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 12:57, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Needs third party sources establishing notability. A lot of professors at major universities like Iowa have had solid careers, but not necessarily notable ones. --Bobak (talk) 19:12, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Insufficient notability to meet inclusion guidelines. ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:57, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Iowa is a major music school, and when they make someone a full professor on the basis of their teaching of performance, I defer to their judgement. On what basis do people here think they can tell better? Why would a newspaper or magazine article or two saying so prove it any the more? Their decision is an independent source for notability.DGG (talk) 22:08, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The University of Iowa judged Prof. Mead's quality as a clarinetist and a teacher of clarinet. By contrast, Wikipedia editors are supposed to judge the quality of the encyclopedia article that can potentially be written about Prof. Mead. The latter judgment can only be made by finding and evaluating independent sources about her. The university's decision to hire or promote her is not a source at all, nor is it an "independent source for notability." It's evidence of well-accomplishment. But well-accomplishment is not notability.
  The University of Iowa hires the best music faculty it can find. Wikipedia editors write neutral encyclopedia articles. Let's keep the two functions separate. 160.39.213.152 (talk) 22:59, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:00, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Obviously, I'm going to go this way as I wrote the article and have studied with her. She's previously served as the secretary of the International Clarinet Association, the principal clarinetist of the Des Moines Symphony, performed widely as a chamber musician, lectured at major symposiums and universities, and has been reviewed in notable music magazines. She is also one of the leading Americans in her main style of music, the choro. What else would notability require. I'll get you the sources if you need them. Clarinet Hawk (talk) 00:05, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "If there are reliable, independent sources that provide significant coverage of the subject, please provide."--Bongomatic
  "Needs third party sources establishing notability."--Bobak
  "The judgment can only be made by finding and evaluating independent sources about her."--Me
  Yes, sources would be helpful. :)
  (Right now, the article seems to be sourced to (and partially copied from) her university webpage, which presents problems of copyright and neutrality.) 160.39.213.152 (talk) 01:33, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]