Talk:Samantha Gorman

Likely unfixable?

I tried to fix this as she is probably notable. However, there has been such a gargantuan attempt to promote the subject that I don't think this draft has any value. Repairing it seems like a pointless task; it would be better for a neutral editor to start over. I actually found a couple of good sources, but this draft has the problem that there are very few neutral statements that sources can be attached to. That leaves us waiting for the creator to fix it, which seems very unlikely given the first draft and also due to the apparent COI. --- Possibly (talk) 23:19, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Restored after redirect

I have reverted User:Czar's redirect of this page to The Under Presents because Samantha Gorman is clearly a notable game developer, author and director in the fields of electronic literature, digital narrative and game development. See this discussion at Teahouse and this AfD deletion discussion for Tender Claws. I think the Tender Claws article should be reinstated too (and initiated a deletion review to discuss this) but if it is, we should discuss what content should be in the article on Gorman and what should be in the article about the development studio. --Lijil (talk) 21:20, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

You keep linking to a Teahouse archive that has no apparent discussion related to this topic. Please clarify. From what I'm seeing, this redirect should be put back in place, as in-depth reliable secondary coverage about Samantha Gorman specifically is not being highlighted. Present the specific sources that prove WP:N is met. You feel or believe she's (or the studio) is notable isn't enough. -- ferret (talk) 13:31, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

I have revised the article and added a lot of sources. Gorman is an assistant professor of game design at Northeastern, and although she hasn't published theoretical scholarship, her R&D into new interfaces for digital narrative is why she holds this academic position. I would argue she fulfils WP:ACADEMIC because her research has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources (I added several citations to scholarship discussing the innovation of the gestural interfaces in touchscreen literature). In terms of general notability, she has given a range of keynotes at industry and academic conferences, and in addition to a range of media coverage of her individual works, she has also been the personal subject of at least two feature interviews discussing her career in general, one in Killscreen (which is listed as a reliable source on Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Sources and another long interview in an scholarly monograph. As for the Teahouse discussion, I am sorry about the incorrect link - I can no longer find the discussion. What I saw was a person who said they had created and edited this article and didn't understand why it was redirected, and someone else replied that since there had been no review or discussion of the redirect, the poster could edit boldly and revert the redirect. The original editor didn't do so, but I did. Lijil (talk) 22:04, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Interviews are not considered independent for purposes of WP:N, as the subject themselves is involved making it a primary source. The first bullet of WP:NACADEMIC explicitly states that it must be demonstrated by independent reliable sources. There's a great deal of primary, unreliable (Medium), and trivial sources in use. Could you please list the sources that are in-depth and show the impact? -- ferret (talk) 00:54, 26 July 2022 (UTC)