Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bart Chabot


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Mdaniels5757 (talk) 17:19, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Bart Chabot

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

As far as I can tell most of the sources are trivial mentions in works about others or are just lists or announcements he is speaking (but its hard as I do not read Dutch). I thus am not sure it passes notabilty. Slatersteven (talk) 13:26, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Slatersteven (talk) 13:26, 10 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep. (person who created the article) It is a well known author. Broodje gezond sold 50.000 exemplaren of as 2003. World cat says: 70 works in 171 publications in 1 language and 1,654 library holdings. I intentionally not list his biography, because this is an English site, but nl:Bart_Chabot has a big list which probably isn't complete. The sources I've used were independent. KittenKlub (talk) 13:30, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Its not the amount you have published that counts, its people noting it that does.Slatersteven (talk) 13:31, 10 June 2020 (UTC)


 * All those reports are independent, and he has often been on television. He did get noticed. About the source from my talk page: From my reply to Slatersteven about the source: 1) University of Utrecht 4) News story from a regular news source 5) That's the Royal Dutch library's biography 6) Indeed that's from his publisher, but it's because the other 2 sequels were not mentioned in 5 7) Independent site 8) News site. The Digital Library is maintained by the Royal Dutch library and has a lot of primary and secondary sources KittenKlub (talk) 13:33, 10 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment Meh. A search shows he seems to be marginally known in Holland, and entirely unknown outside of it. There is reporting in what appear to be good Dutch publications, although it is more often than not interviews. He has published many books but it is tricky to tell if they are self-published or not, as there is no publisher data in the article, and there don't appear to be many reviews. Overall he seems like a fringe topic that would be marginally known in Dutch but someone who has received basically no coverage in English. Of course, lanuguage spoken does not really matter, but it does help contextualize the notability discussion. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 13:59, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * True but he seems to be more notable for knowing notable people (at least that is my impression), rather than being notable in his own right.Slatersteven (talk) 14:03, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Well he does seem to be known there. They do things differently in Holland, sometimes in ways that defy strict reason. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 14:08, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * But not not phenomenally well known, but rather an obscure poet (as far as I can tell), hence the AFD. Does he pass notability or is he just one of these ephemeral figures who hover on the edge of the artistic community, a Dutch version of the character Tony Hancock played.Slatersteven (talk) 14:14, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm still "meh" on this. Not a loss to EN-wiki if deleted, not really a gain if kept. I don't read enough Dutch to assess the sources for notability. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 14:24, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * His official website points to De Bezige Bij which happens to be one of the most important publishing houses. KittenKlub (talk) 14:09, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Again, we need sources wholly independent of him showing that anyone gives a damn about his work, his work, not the work of people he knew, him. It dos not matter if the "the best publisher in the world" published 1,000,000,000 of his books, if no one gave a damn. Please read wp:n.Slatersteven (talk) 14:12, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * The Royal Dutch library is totally independent and therefore the Digital Library is a totally independent view of him using the primary and secondary who permitted republication. KittenKlub (talk) 14:16, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Libraries list all the books they hold, that does not establish notability.Slatersteven (talk) 14:25, 10 June 2020 (UTC)


 * I haven't looked at the sources even, but (being Dutch) I can assure you that just about every Dutch person would know who he is. He is very well known. Vexations (talk) 14:27, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * So how about linking to a review of his work, as wp:v means we cannot just accept your word he is famous.Slatersteven (talk) 14:33, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Why do we only hear your word? Because how on earth could Bart Chabot not meet notability? KittenKlub (talk) 15:15, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Don't take my word for it. It's pretty easy actually; someone has to do a WP:BEFORE and it would help if they knew something about Dutch media so they know where to look. I've reviewed all the sources that are in the article now and they're pretty much all useless except for https://www.dbnl.nl/tekst/bork001schr01_01/bork001schr01_01_0186.php, which is a good source. If you run that article through google translate or deeple (which does a better job) you get something that is quite readable in English, and ought to give you a pretty good sense of what an encyclopedic entry on Chabot could look like. Vexations (talk) 15:58, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Which is why I asked for better sources and was in effect told "these are good enough". If there are better sources (such as reviews) post a couple here.Slatersteven (talk) 16:03, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * They are reliable independent sources. What more do you want? KittenKlub (talk) 16:11, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I think we understand the positions that both of you are taking here, perhaps we should now leave space for other editors to comment and provide their views. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 16:13, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

https://www.hebban.nl/Search?q=bart+chabot Many books on an official review site. KittenKlub (talk) 16:14, 10 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep Chabot is a so-called BN'er, a nl:Bekende Nederlander, (the English equivalent would be an A-list celibrity) . He frequently appears on radio and television and has been a successful published author for almost 40 years. I'll mention this just in case anyone is wondering about a potential conflict of interest (my Dutch nationality etc.) that I don't particularly like his work. Now, about the sources. The are not wrong, and they are all reliable, but they don't do a particularly good job at establishing why he would be notable. For that, we need to show that mainstream media have critically engaged with his writing. And that exists, in abundance, in fact. In some of the highest quality media in the Netherlands, such as https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2020/02/27/het-begint-onschuldig-met-vieze-vanillevla-a3991979 for example. I've added other sources to the article. I don't particularly like working on Chabot (like I said, not a fan), but am available to help someone who does want to work on the article., you perhaps? Oh, Speedy Keep. Vexations (talk) 17:09, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Help is welcome. KittenKlub (talk) 17:12, 10 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep per analysis by Vexations.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 17:20, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:27, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:27, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:27, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been removed from the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 20:50, 14 June 2020 (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.