Talk:Pamela Hanrahan
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=logo}
Pamela Hanrahan Notability
editPlease continue all discussion here. Refrain from re-adding tags until discussion is complete MrsSnoozyTurtle.
As I will repeat, "Notability is based on the existence of suitable sources, not on the state of sourcing in an article". Your issue with referencing is irrelevant. I will expand referenced material in due course anyhow.
Here lists 24 different book contributions, 28 different journal articles and 5 different reports https://research.unsw.edu.au/people/professor-pamela-hanrahan/publications?type=journalarticles
This search engine query illustrates her presence in popular financial media https://news.google.com/search?q=Pamela%20Hanrahan&hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US%3Aen
Discontinue defaming this article until you provide ample reason, instead of the use of a glancing judgement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martian2 (talk • contribs) 05:35, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- not one of those articles features significant coverage of her- only passing mentions which do not establish notability. Nightenbelle (talk) 16:46, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- I saw this listed at DRN and agree with what Nightenbelle says in this closure. Note that there is a difference between tagging an article and removing material from an article; tags are not a badge of shame (or "defamation") under Wikipedia principles, just a note to alert others that work is needed. Finally, the article you link above is just a normal article, not a Wikipedia policy or guideline so is irrelevant to this discussion. As Nightenbelle says, the cure to the tag is to add the reliable sources that you claim to have, not to edit war or try to finagle a solution here. — TransporterMan (TALK) 17:10, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Nightenbelle thankyou for clarifying this. As you have provided an acute reason, I will rectify sourcing to your specifications. Martian2 (talk) 14:46, 25 June 2022 (UTC)