Talk:Richard Denner/Archive 1

establishing notability
It is my understanding that per WP:BIO, Richard Denner is considered notable if there are multiple reliable sources dissecting his importance. I believe that his profile at the Electronic Poetry Center SUNY Buffalo and this analysis of his work at Big Bridge constitute such. However, I edited both, thus submit the sites to others for consideration. JonathanPenton 03:44, 20 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your open approach to this question. I find it difficult to be positive about his notability.  While the two references you provide demonstrate that people read his poems, it seems a very specialized selection of poetry readers who recognize him.  The waters have been muddied further by Richard apparently editing the article himself, which makes it difficult (see WP:COI).  This is usually an indicator of a non-notable person trying to increase his notability.  I can't get away from the fact that he gets fewer than 500 Google Hits, which again indicates a low level of notability.  I'd appreciate comments from other editors, before we consider going to AfD.  Gillyweed 05:38, 20 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for looking into it, and your patience with seeking consensus. I sourced the article, and added some information on Denner's collaboration with David Bromige. I don't have an "interest" in that work, and my understanding is that that's permissible under WP:COI, but let me know if I've misunderstood. I welcomed Denner, so hopefully he'll understand policy better (I don't understand it very well myself, and please forgive if I formatted the sources poorly). JonathanPenton 19:46, 23 March 2007 (UTC)