Talk:Nina F. Ichikawa

Notability?

I do not see how this article fits the Wikipedia's notability guidance with regards to independent sources. Reference 1 was written by the subject, Reference 2 is a broken link, Reference 3, 4 and 5 are from organizations closely affiliated with the subject. Bigpencils (talk) 15:12, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

I do not believe an article for an actual notable person would be half constituted of referenced quotes, i.e. "the subject said this to an outlet". Many of these sources reference the subject for 1-2 sentences only. None of the quotes seem particularly notable and I'm not sure why they would be included so heavily in the article. These quotes tell us nothing about the subject or her work, but rather what she thinks about another subject, which seems irrelevant. The only relevant information that comes out of these pieces about the subject is her position and employer.

The criteria for WP:BASIC is "People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject" and "trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources may not be sufficient to establish notability." Footnote7 also states that "Non-triviality is a measure of the depth of content of a published work, and how far removed that content is from a simple directory entry or a mention in passing ("John Smith at Big Company said..." or "Mary Jones was hired by My University") that does not discuss the subject in detail," and all of the sources which quickly quote Ishikawa would be considered trivial. I disagree that the Guardian, Huffpost, NBCBayArea, New York Times sources constitute 'significant coverage' for this reason and do not contribute to WP:GNG.

The Berkeley High Jacket is a high school paper, and the alumni association profile has no editorial standards, so I don't think they meet WP:RS. The Berkeley Food Institute and Hyphen references are her places of employment, and as such is not independent and does not meet WP:RS. Eating Asian in America, Threads and the NBC News piece were all written by Ichikawa and as such are not independent. The San Francisco Chronicle piece is not a profile, but a human interest piece about tiny homes that has nothing to do with Ishikawa's work or accomplishments, so I don't see how that contributes to notability. I do think the SFGate and Eater references are good sources, though I don't know if starting a club in high school rises to the notability standard and the Eater article isn't really about Ichikawa's work or accomplishments. Bigpencils (talk) 16:45, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

I have responded to these issues in the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nina Fallenbaum discussion, and in the interest of keeping the discussion organized, it seems best to continue the discussion there, at least while the AfD is open. Beccaynr (talk) 17:56, 10 February 2021 (UTC)