Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dima zales


 * 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. --BDD (talk) 19:33, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Dima Zales

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article about a new author that cannot source its claims. Given sources are own web sites or blogs. Fails WP:AUTHOR at all, not one of the mentioned books has a reliable source or an article. All in all a promotional article. Ben Ben (talk) 21:19, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Ben Ben (talk) 21:40, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. Ben Ben (talk) 21:40, 2 February 2014 (UTC)


 * I disagree. His books are for sale on Amazon and other common online book stores with hundreds of public reviews. The article is definitely written with a NPOV. One reference leads straight to an article about the book in the magazine MarieClaire - Phillips. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.150.21.186 (talk) 23:57, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I just found an article on the books on Womansday. I'll add the reference - Phillips. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.150.21.186 (talk) 00:01, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
 *  Speedy Delete per WP:A7. Wieno (talk) 00:06, 3 February 2014 (UTC) as I agree that he does not meet WP:AUTHOR. Wieno (talk) 07:01, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Shouldn't you wait for some agreement before you actually nominate the article for speedy deletion? Either it'll get deleted before this discussion finishes, which seems like a run around the process, or it won't, in which case I don't see the point.—Neil 02:01, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
 * AFD and Speedy Delete have different thresholds. In this case I feel it fails both thresholds so I nominated for speedy delete too. If it doesn't meet the lower A7 threshold then an admin can delete it quickly and it doesn't need to continue to take up space and time on AFD for the rest of the week. If it does meet the A7 threshold then it can await the results of this discussion to see if it meets the notability guideline. An AFD nomination does not preclude speedy deletion if the criteria for speedy deletion are met. Wieno (talk) 03:33, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. In that case, speedy deletion is usually aborted if another editor thinks the article doesn't unambiguously meet the criteria. In this case, I think the article does make a credible claim of significance—that Zales is a published science fiction author—so I'm removing the tag. I still don't think Zales is notable, but, as you pointed out, that's a separate issue.—Neil 06:40, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Per your change, I've adjusted from a Speedy Delete to a Delete. He does not appear to be a significant enough author to meet the notability guidelines. Wieno (talk) 07:01, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. I've checked Google and LexisNexis and I can't find any substantial coverage (Phillips, that would be articles of, say, 500 words or more—one-paragraph reviews don't quite do it.)—Neil 02:01, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - Hi, I wrote the article in question (therefore I admit I may be biased). I actually wrote it because I searched for Dima Zales having read his book but nothing came up. I would like to say that I think he is notable given his high sales and the exposure received on such popular mediums and the fact that his books have been translated into German also. Cheers Lachlan.00 (talk) 07:07, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree with Lachlan — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.61.149.100 (talk) 05:01, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - Neil, I think coverage by the likes of USA today, Woman's day magazine and Marie Claire Magazine need not have to be some specific size. Using Woman's day as an example - the other articles in the their "Lit Fix" are about the likes of Nora Roberts, E L James etc. Just like Marie Claire usually covers the likes of JK Rowling etc. If it is a matter of finding verbose reviews, I included a couple and > 20 more are available, from different size blogs and publications, if that would help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AmidTheSea (talk • contribs) 22:31, 4 February 2014 (UTC)  — AmidTheSea (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * I disagree. First, USA Today, Woman's Day, and Marie Claire are the only reliable sources we have. laurendawes.blogspot.com, Book Bliss, and Emma Michaels are all well and good, but they're not a factor in notability. Second, the notability guideline says that the mere presence of sources isn't enough; the sources need to have "significant coverage" of Zales. We can argue over the definition of that, but in this case size very much does matter.—Neil 01:34, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
 * The point I was trying to make was that if Marie Claire puts a book on their Summer Read list, the prestige offered to the book is transferred to it's author. As in, if someone talks about Harry Potter favorably, that makes JK Rowling more notable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AmidTheSea (talk • contribs) 02:45, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, I take your point, but on Wikipedia it doesn't matter what Marie Claire thinks about the book; all depends on how much it writes about it. Even if they called it the best book of the century, it wouldn't help us unless they actually wrote at least several hundred words explaining why—we can't use our own perspectives and knowledge when writing an article, so unless reliable sources like Marie Claire give us some, we're out of luck.—Neil 13:57, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
 * The thing is that WP:AUTHOR says that a notable book only makes its author notable if the book is so notable that it's the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or multiple full book reviews. In essence a book can be Wikipedia-notable without being notable enough to also give its author notability. I don't think the few book reviews cited are enough to warrant making this author notable. Wieno (talk) 05:44, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, the interesting thing is that "multiple independent periodical articles or reviews" is pretty much what's needed to make a book notable, so you could argue that, by the guideline, any author of a notable book automatically becomes notable themself. At any rate, neither is notable here.—Neil 13:50, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I think "multiple independent periodical articles or reviews" is exactly what is going on here, so I don't think it would be fair to question these books notability. I just added RT Book Review and ebookmeter.info (for German version of the book). Otherwise, why would it be mentioned at all by USA Today, reviewed by RT Book Review and recommended to read by Woman's Day and Marie Claire? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AmidTheSea (talk • contribs) 16:44, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:14, 4 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete Wikipedia has criteria for inclusion. In this case, WP:AUTHOR may be relevant, but the general guidelines could be applied also. No one in this discussion so far has made an argument that this article complies with Wikipedia guidelines for inclusion, and I have failed to identify the kind of sources required in my reviewing them.  Blue Rasberry    (talk)   17:08, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
 * It is written with a NPOV, sources major media - if the author is relevant, why else would it fail the guidelines? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.220.3.101 (talk) 20:51, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment A lot of Single-purpose accounts and Unregistered Users in this Afd - two different IPs from the same Universitsy, one is writing and deleting on User talk:Lachlan.00 too. How comes?--Ben Ben (talk) 23:25, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete, I don't see that he meets WP:AUTHOR. Specifically, the coverage in the reliable sources seems to be mostly about his books rather than about him as a person.  I think his books might be notable, but not the author at this time.  Lankiveil (speak to me) 12:44, 10 February 2014 (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.