Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lauran Gangl

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. Sr 13 05:46, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lauran Gangl[edit]

Notability of the subject is not established.

Speedy delete G11 and A7 - she's not notable, and the page is a blatant promotional autobiography. The picture tells you everything you need to know about her (and some things you might prefer not to know), so that should be deleted also. Yechiel Man 14:45, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak ~~Keep~~ Delete(edited to add: The claims have not be substantiated despite contacting the author and requesting more specifics) The article looks like it was created by someone not skilled in formatting and organizing a good Wikipedia article, so it could use some help, but the subject appears to have sufficient notability for an article. The article claims she competed in the Calgary Junior Olympics in 1988 and placed 14th in figure skating, which is remarkable for a Type 1 diabetic. This bears confirmation through someone with access to the records of that competition.(All I could confirm was that Calgary hosted the 1988 Winter Olympics). In another area, she appears to be a successful musician and songwriter, with a band which toured internationally, to have been written up in Newsweek, and is claimed to have received two gold and one platinum awards from the RIAA. Refs need confirmation and cleanup and article needs cleanup. Nothing at all wrong with the picture if it meets Wikipedias licensing standards. Edison 14:52, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Definitely some borderline claims to notability in there, but the article is totally unreferenced/OR, has possible NPOV issues (is promotional), looks like a possible COI or autobiography, and on top of all that, it's one of the most badly formatted messes of articles I've seen in a long time. Since it's unreferenced, the information is not verified. Sources do exist though (google her name), although whether they are reliable is another question altogether.-h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 14:58, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The notability of the subject is in question. My original reaction was a weak keep and strip the article down to an appropriate length but what is left does not appear more than promo material. --Stormbay 18:52, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Spent a few hours cleaning up the article and checking references. This one is unusual in approaching notability from several vastly different aspects of the subject's life rather than from one aspect only. Seems to be a legitimate musician per [1] and references discussed on the talk page showing she sang backups for notable musicians, and that notable musicians have appeared doing backups for her albums. I could not directly verify awards won, but that does not rule them out. Appears to have skated in 1988 junior olympics, to have gained PhD in marine biology, and to operate swim school for diabetic children, having had juvenile diabetes from age 4. Her band apparently toured all over US and in Canada, which would perhaps qualify the band under WP:MUSIC. Perhaps someone with better access to University Microfilms UMI can verify dissertation, see if any notability accrues from it. I do not follow this music scene, so I'm not sure what does or does not prove notability. No evidence of chart-topping, but several albums are for sale via Itunes etc. Edison 19:36, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as unverified unless carefully checked in every detail against sources which do not derive in any way from her, including all blog postings and reported interviews and photographs without authentication. It looked strange that the article never mentioned the university of her degree, or the year. I cannot find any possible PhD receipient in any field of study in Dissertation Abstracts with her last name and a first name beginning with L. (there a hint that her birth name is Laura, not Lauran.) (I also checked her first name with her husband's last name. ) Diss Abs sometimes runs a few months behind, so I checked in google scholar and found nothing at all that could have been a biology thesis or any marine biology publication formal or informal by her name. Ditto in Scopus or Scirus. Ditto even in Google! I conclude that this part of the biography is fake, and I consequently wonder how much of the rest has been invented. DGG 03:44, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, fails WP:V on several points. An internationally-known musician, who sang backup for top-drawer acts, and has 10 friends on MySpace and 7 listeners on Last.fm? Doesn't add up. I tried to verify the three songwriting claims here, since they aren't in her AllMusic credits, and came up dry (although two of them turn up as GangBangs songs). There seems to be a lot of name-dropping going on, and to be perfectly honest, I get a bit of an Essjay vibe here. Unless it's from an unimpeachable third party source, I doubt almost everything in this bio. Whic is too bad, I liked the song on her MySpace.--Dhartung | Talk 06:16, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 09:56, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 09:56, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per nom, non-notable, and fails WP:V. WATP ^(talk) • _(contribs) 18:32, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment More information is now on the talk page relative to the subject. Her PhD was while she was married to Jake Mancini, so apparently the name would be J. L. Mancini or Janet Lauran Mancini or Janet Lauran Mancini. It is claimed to be from June 2003, Univerity of Newcastle, England-- Ophthamology Sciences. This would relate to research she is claimed to have done on the eyes of sharks. The comment also mentions St Andrews University, Scotland-- Marine Sciences, but it is not clear if this is related to some joint study related to the PhD or to her undergrad work. The poster says her subsequent professional work was as "Dr. Lauran Gangl-Plant" aster her second marriage. Perhaps someone with access to dissertation abstracts could now confirm this. Edison 20:42, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Reads like advertising or promotional material. Her connection to marine biology is completely unreferenced. The tone of the article does not inspire confidence that it is all correct. It shouldn't be up to regular Wikipedia editors to rescue an article that has so many shortcomings. EdJohnston 22:24, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Attempt to verify the scientific career I can't verify any part of it under any likely name. Not the thesis, not any possible publication. No one by any of the names has ever gotten a PhD at Newcastle UK. No one by any name at all has ever gotten a PhD there on shark eyes. She would certainly not have been notable as a scientist anyway with a thesis and 1 or 2 published papers, I did the work because he absence of solid information where it should be found makes one doubt the rest. Possibly I've slipped up--possibly the name was altogether different than any of the 3 proposed. If the award winning records can't be verified either, I'd conclude the whole to be irresponsible exaggeration. DGG 05:31, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment The creator of the article, User talk:Ladymermaid , Elle Tyler- Gangl , the sister in law of the subject, has not replied to postings on her discussion page with such useful details as the title of the dissertation, or which of several names the subject might have used on the dissertation or any publications. In any event, being a PhD certainly would not satisfy WP:BIO. Ditto for a newspaper reference, even without a web link, for the claimed skating in a junior olympics, which also by itself would not justify an article. Ditto for awards for songwriting. The claims have not been proven, nor have they been disproven. This has not struck me as a hoax article, but as more of a tribute to a relative, but I am now switching to a call for deleting it. If someone, someday, comes up with adequate referencing, especially with an adequate claim of notability, it could always be re-created. Edison 17:17, 16 June 2007 (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.