From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 keep. Discussion on which direction a possible move would go can continue editorially. Star Mississippi 02:26, 19 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Gerald Foos

Gerald Foos (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Extent of notability unclear. A voyeur covered in an article by The New Yorker's Gay Talese, and in a Netflix documentary directed by Myles Kane and Josh Koury. Steven Spielberg and Sam Mendes also intended on creating a film about Foos. Is all this enough to establish notability? Mooonswimmer 16:48, 27 October 2022 (UTC) reply

Comment TOOSOON seems to apply, maybe when the films finally come out and he gets more traction. Too soon for a voyeur, words you never thought you'd say. Oaktree b ( talk) 18:15, 27 October 2022 (UTC) reply

The film has already come out, ok then. I don't see much more than what's given in the article already. Oaktree b ( talk) 18:16, 27 October 2022 (UTC) reply
The book was released in 2016 and the film, Voyeur (film) was released in 2017. Cullen328 ( talk) 18:19, 27 October 2022 (UTC) reply
Delete, I'm not seeing much traction having been gained in the last 5 years. Trivial mentions. Oaktree b ( talk) 20:05, 27 October 2022 (UTC) reply
So you think that a 240 page book written by famous author Gay Talese and a 96 minute documentary film shown on Netflix, and a bunch of newspaper articles amounts to "trivial mentions", Oaktree b? Cullen328 ( talk) 21:48, 27 October 2022 (UTC) reply
they don't turn up in Gsearch Oaktree b ( talk) 00:16, 28 October 2022 (UTC) reply
Oaktree b, I was easily able to find coverage in the Washington Post and the New York Times and the New Yorker and the Denver Post and Slate and Forbes and Vogue and National Public Radio and the Los Angeles Times and The Atlantic and Mccleans. And many others. And many of these publications ran several articles about Foos. He's notable. Cullen328 ( talk) 01:25, 28 October 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect: Just created a redirect for The Voyeur's Motel to go to Voyeur (film). The article for Foos gets more than 150 visits a day on average, so don't delete it, just do the same for that one. — Mainly 20:35, 27 October 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:26, 3 November 2022 (UTC) reply

  • Move to and cleanup at The Voyeur's Motel. I've temporarily redirected that page to Gerald Foos, but it should be the other way around. The Gay Talese article/book is the primary topic, which achieved widespread notability and was covered not just with reviews, but with several rounds of news coverage. There should be another article about the derivative documentary film, which is partly about Talese and his article/book. (As described, e.g. here in New York Magazine/The Vulture [1].) Coverage of the book:
  • The Guardian [2]
  • LA Times [3]
  • New York Times [4] [5]
  • NPR [6]
  • Washington Post [7]
  • Publisher's Weekly [8]
  • Clarion Ledger [9]
Per WP:CRIME, we don't need an article about the perpetrator directly when the info can be included in the article about the journalistic investigation/article/book. Jahaza ( talk) 04:08, 4 November 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Keep and it's not close given the sourcing Cullen328 identified. This is no intended to forestall a move - I think focusing on the book make a lot of sense, but that's an editorial decision that can be hashed out on the appropriate talk pages. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 05:50, 11 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty ( talk) 12:06, 11 November 2022 (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.