Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew Demcak


 * 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   delete.   A rbitrarily 0   ( talk ) 14:36, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Andrew Demcak

 * – ( View AfD View log ) •

I declined a G2 on this, which made no sense, though G11 might have been meant. In any event, upon investigation I have not been able to confirm any notability. Three Candles Press the publisher of one of his books and which gave him the writing award listed in the article (website), are a print on demand publisher, actually saying so on their website (many of the same, like Publish America, deny they are). The other publishers listed appear to be vanity presses or e-zines or something other than traditional presses. I have looked through Google book results and news results and have not found any third-party independent reliable sources discussing him substantively. The best claim to notability in the article is that he was "featured at The Best American Poetry." I'm not sure what "featured" here means, but searching for him in connection with them, I have only found what appears to be a sprawling astroturfing campaign. There is also a claim that his poetry is taught at two universities. The reference for the claim is to a dead link. In any event, if no reliable independent third-party sources can be found on a topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:22, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't think that dead link would have helped anyway. From what I can make out, it would probably not count as a truly independent source. Peridon (talk) 09:52, 14 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  —Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:31, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions.  —Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:31, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

I understand the G2 decline. G11 would have been more appropriate. Based on Google searches that have turned up little of note, combined with an astroturfing campaign, I believe Wikipedia should delete this article. LiteralLit (talk) 17:39, 11 November 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:41, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment BlazeVOX (another of his publishers according to goodreads although he doesn't appear to be on their authors list) don't give the impression of being self-publishing, but with Ezra Pound as editor-in-chief anything could happen... (They describe themselves as publishers of 'weird little books'. I like it.) Casa Menendez Press I can find nothing about - except that Demcak's name seems to surface along with a mention of his latest work whenever you find them on a certain well known search engine. Print on demand isn't always self-publishing - even big publishers can use it for lower demand works. I don't think Three Candles or BlazeVOX are self-publishing - but could be wrong. Casa Menendez could be the subject himself or he's their only client. Until you get to the level of Andrew Motion or Seamus Heaney (or even Pam Ayres...) notability is not always easy to show proof for. There certainly seems to be a concerted campaign going on (which I an not knocking him for - one has to get one's work noticed). It does make it harder to find the wheat amongst the chaff - the wheat being what complies with WP:RS. Peridon (talk) 18:19, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 12:52, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Weak Keep It has good enough sources and the article shows his notability. Parker1297   ( Talk to me · Sign my autograph page.)                              03:47, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Casa Menendez Press is more commonly known as GOSS183 Press and is very much an established imprint. Poets whose works have appeared in this press's publications (which include MiPOesias, OCHO, and Poets and Artists, as well as numerous print and e-books) include this year's National Book Award winner Terrance Hayes (http://mipoesias.com/interviews/terrance-hayes/),  MacArthur Genius Grant Winner Campbell McGrath (http://www.amazon.com/OCHO-9-Anthony-Robinson/dp/0557033365/ref=sr_1_45?ie=UTF8&qid=1290694054&sr=8-45), NEA Grant Winner Denise Duhamel (http://www.amazon.com/Poets-Artists-Sept-2009-Portrait/dp/1449507921/ref=sr_1_5?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1290695103&sr=1-5), and other award winning poets such as Billy Collins, Lorna Dee Cervantes, David Lehman, Franz Wright, Bob Hicok, WD Snodgrass, Barbara Jane Reyes, Mark Doty, Mark Strand, and Willie Perdomo, along with many other iconic American voices. Some of the poems, books, and/or magazines that have been published by GOSS183 (and its various incarnations) have been anthologized in the Best American Poetry series and the Pushcart Prize series, and they also have been featured at the Poetry Foundation's Harriet blog, the Best American Poetry blog, Verse Daily, and Ted Kooser's American Life in Poetry. Based on the quality of poetry published by GOSS183, and the prominent stature of its featured poets, among whom Andrew Demcak is a part of, this entry should remain intact.

Posted by Emma Trelles, author of Little Spells (GOSS183) and Tropicalia, forthcoming in 2011 from the University of Notre Dame Press and winner of the Andres Montoya Poetry Prize. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Emmatrelles (talk • contribs) 15:08, 25 November 2010 (UTC) 1. http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/976279.Andrew_Demcak – Goodreads, a privately run "social cataloging" website, is not a reliable source. 2. http://www.amazon.com/Catching-Tigers-Weather-Andrew-Demcak/dp/0977089231 – this link to Amazon.com is not a reliable source because the content has not received editorial oversight. 3. http://www.blazevox.org/bk-ad.htm – this page contains a copy of comments made on Amazon.com and is not a reliable source. 4. A page from Goodreads. See #1. 5. http://www.versedaily.org/2010/aboutandrewdemcakashc.shtml – VerseDaily, an "independently owned daily publication of quality poetry on the worldwide web" accepts submissions from authors and cannot be considered a reliable source that establishes notability. 6. A blog post on goldwakepress.org is not a reliable source. 7. http://thebestamericanpoetry.typepad.com/the_best_american_poetry/2009/02/big-love-little-books.html – a blog hosted on the blogging service TypePad is not reliable. 8. A link to the subject's work on issuu.com is not a third-party reliable source. 9. A listing on the Library of Congress catalog does not establish notability because first, it is a directory listing, and second, there is no editorial oversight. 10. A passing mention in an OSU syllabus does not establish notability. The passing mention is: "Tuesday 10/11 Day 6: The Rhetorical Gaze and Analyzing Visual Images CARMEN: Edgar Allen Poe, "A Dream within a Dream"; John Berryman, "Dream Song 8"; Andrew Demcak, "Young Man with Ipod"" 11. http://www.threecandles.org/poetry/ademcak.html – this page is an HTTP 404. Judging by the homepage, http://www.threecandles.org, I do not believe this website is a reliable source because it is self-published, albeit not by the subject of the article.
 * Delete per the lack of significant coverage in reliable sources.

I have read through this Google News Archive search and have been unable to find significant coverage in reliable sources about Andrew Demcak; the coverage that pertains to him consists of passing mentions in calendar listings. This is the same with a Google search which returns mostly unreliable sources such as blogs and the sources listed above. A Google Books search returns Demcak's own work, passing mentions, or unrelated results. Because the sources in the article fail to pass the muster of Reliable sources, the article fails Verifiability. This article should be deleted for failing Notability (people) and Notability (music) and for violating Verifiability and Biographies of living persons. Cunard (talk) 07:52, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete or userfy if requested. The sources are weak and suffer from self-promotion. The apparently long term blatant COI edits on the article from single-purpose accounts with suspect direct comments in the citations included such as "Note: To the people at Wikipedia - None of my publications are from vanity presses; they are all small, independent publishers" makes me doubt that a neutral point of view could be possible unless the article were reduced to a stub and there were clear commitment from contributors to avoid COI. Fæ (talk) 14:22, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Sole real claim of notability is minor award. No secondary sources analyze this poet. Let him get a professorship at a small liberal arts college and then revisit the issue. Abductive  (reasoning) 14:14, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * 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.