Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Francis Brabazon


 * 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. KaisaL (talk) 03:04, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Francis Brabazon
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable, badly refed like this deleted page  Saint Aviator  lets talk 03:50, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2017 March 8.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 04:00, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment The references are weak, and searches don't turn up much, but there's at least one biography written about him, and he receives mention, albeit mostly in passing, in a number of books via Google book search. 2601:188:1:AEA0:D5FA:9AFC:6E2B:8DD (talk) 04:03, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:14, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:14, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:14, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Spirituality-related deletion discussions.  Saint Aviator  lets talk</i> 23:01, 23 March 2017 (UTC)


 * delete fails WP:AUTHOR. writing a lot of non notable books doesn't add to notability. no major awards for himself or his books. LibStar (talk) 02:42, 9 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep. Adding to the above book (reviewed in Journal for the Academic Study of Religion, Vol 18, No 1 (2005)) (probobly started life as a phd thesis ). ABC's Radio National broadcast a show about him . National Library of Australia has a "book" of Biographical cuttings on Francis Brabazon, containing one or more cuttings from newspapers or journals . State Library Victoria has similar . There is another book about him, The water carrier : a mosaic of the poet, Francis Brabazon by Robert Rouse . AustLit shows 3 works about him and 10 about his work . Includes Francis Brabazon : A New Measure in Modern Australian Poetry Ross Keating, 1996 criticism — Appears in: Religion, Literature and the Arts : Conference Proceedings [1996]; (p. 185-193). Other articles appear in publications such as Australien zwischen Europa und Asien, 1993, The Bulletin, 1964, Australian Book Review, 1963,  Quadrant, 1958,  Meanjin, 1957 and 1958,  The Sydney Morning Herald, 1957 and  Walkabout, 1954. Also an article in Sydney Studies in Religion . Enough coverage for notability. duffbeerforme (talk) 02:49, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment Robert Rouse was a Baba follower. His book was self published by funds from Bill Le Page, by deesh Books, now gone as a publisher. Le Pages page was deleted last week. He is also a Baba follower  as is Ross Keating who is Le pages son in law . Look for this, 'Jenny ( married Ross Keating )' here  All Brabazons books are published by Baba Followers i.e Meher Baba Foundation Australia, Sheriar Press, Beacon Hill Publishing. Also note, there are No references in this article, none whatsoever. The reading list are all Baba followers. The Phd the above poster mentions early in the first 2 links is none other than Ross Keating. Who also does the Radio show in the next link. So all of these three supporting points are one man, Keating, pushing his self published book. The next point the newspaper cuttings includes Brabazons obituary. Hardly notable, Ancestry.com is packed with that info about just about everyone from that time. The next point was Rouse, covered above. The last supporting point by the above poster is our main man, Keating, again, who else. These supporting points are almost all Ross Keating. Duffbeerforme, did you not see that? <b style="color:blue">Saint Aviator </b> <i style="color:blue">lets talk</i> 20:41, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
 * "These supporting points are almost all Ross Keating." Well the ones you addressed are. How about the others that you skipped. They form the majority of sources. Australien zwischen Europa und Asien, 1993, The Bulletin, 1964, Australian Book Review, 1963,  Quadrant, 1958,  Meanjin, 1957 and 1958,  The Sydney Morning Herald, 1957 and  Walkabout, 1954. No by Keating.
 * ABC source is published by ABC, a major reputable publisher.
 * Yes the Bill Le Page page was bad and should have been deleted but this one is not about him.
 * "The next point the newspaper cuttings includes Brabazons obituary." Does it? What else does it contain? Obits are common but the NLA does not collect all obits in a "book" dedicated to random individuals. They are not indiscriminate.
 * Keatings books self published? Could be, does not seem to be a regular publisher. Big point against it. In it's favour, Keating is not just a random follower, he is "is a senior lecturer in the School of Education at the Australian Catholic University." and the book has been independently reviewed. Might not be independent enough for GNG but Brabazon passes without it.
 * "Also note, there are No references in this article, none whatsoever." At the moment no, but over the years it has had. But more important sources exist and are verifiable. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:33, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
 * A comment on content. I say he passes gng on the strength of those sources from AustLit. Those sources are mostly reviews of his books of poetry. They are not about his devotion to Baba The relative weight given to what is covered needs to reflect the sourcing. Outside of Baba devotion sources there is reviews of his poetry so Wikipedia should reflect that poetry. duffbeerforme (talk) 10:53, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
 * The others I skipped were not linked / refed. They dont count. Sadly Im not going to run around finding your links. Keating is self published. Re no refs, Wikipedia protocol is clear, not refs, delete. Hes not notable enough. Any refs that exist to provide the meat of the article are devotional self published. It looks like the picture is dodgy too, <b style="color:blue">Saint Aviator </b> <i style="color:blue">lets talk</i> 21:18, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Have a read of WP:OFFLINE. duffbeerforme (talk) 04:24, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  J 947  08:00, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Weak delete. It does seem that the subject has been promoted by some people with family (?) COI, but their motivations don't matter that much. Regardless her reasons, Ross Keating managed to publish several academic works about the subject. That said, the sources are few, and kind of stretched. The point to keep in mind is that not all poets are notable, and this bio does seem to fail WP:CREATIVE. No awards, no coverage except one (?) dedicated fan-scholar or so. I am afraid he is not an encyclopedic material, not until more scholars, journalists or such become interested in him and publish a bit more about him. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 08:38, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * User:Piotrus. You state that beyond Keating there is no coverage. What about the reviews of Brabazons work that were published in Australien zwischen Europa und Asien, 1993, The Bulletin, 1964, Australian Book Review, 1963, Quadrant, 1958, Meanjin, 1957 and 1958, The Sydney Morning Herald, 1957 and Walkabout, 1954. None of those are by Keating. duffbeerforme (talk) 11:06, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Sounds good, but cite your sources. Please link to said publications, cite them properly, describe how you found that they mention the subject, etc. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 13:53, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * . They were found on AustLit. If logged in you get a Biography here and a list of Works About Their Works here. This bapge has the works titles, Author, brief not on what it is and where it appears (with Publication, Date, volume details, pages).
 * eg. Untitled Charles Higham, 1957 review
 * — Appears in: The Sydney Morning Herald, 26 January 1957; (p. 12)
 * — Review of The Hexagon Hal Porter 1956 selected work poetry ; Seven Stars to Morning Francis Brabazon 1956 selected work poetry
 * I don't know how much should be copied from AustLit given that is a subscription service.
 * Contents are mostly reviews of his books, Proletarians-Transition * 2, The East-West Gathering * 2, Cantos of Wandering * 2,  Seven Stars to Morning * 2. Others are more general "criticism".
 * Also could you consider the Biographical cuttings on him available in at least two major libraries. duffbeerforme (talk) 10:28, 22 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Since unfortunately I cannot log in, I cannot express my opinion on those sources beyond "they are promising". Regarding reproduction, well, I stand by "knowledge should be free", and add that I have seen on a number of occasion people providing screenshots of otherwise locked content here (of course, we cannot upload them to wiki servers, but there's a ton of free hosts out there). If you have qualms about that, that's fine, but being able to show such screenshots could strengthen the keep side's argument significantly. Seeing is believing, etc. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 07:08, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Checking Poet lists Hes not listed as a famous Australian poet here or here  or here . Quite an extensive list.  <b style="color:blue">Saint Aviator </b> <i style="color:blue">lets talk</i> 03:47, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not notable. Dazedbythebell (talk) 23:48, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
 * For those that want to ignore offline sourcing perhaps have a look at Rumi - Past and Present, East and West, by Franklin D. Lewis (Oneworld Publications) and Meanjin, Volume 17, Issue 72   (1958, see above. "Cantos of Wandering is one of the most curious books of pseudo-poetry ever published in Australia.") and another Meanjin . And what may convince everyone of notability, the New Oxford Book of Australian Verse from Oxford University Press includes him . (other minor snippetts   ). duffbeerforme (talk) 10:28, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Reply The link above for the 'New Oxford Book of Australian Verse' lists his name on this article being discussed for deletion. A self fulfilling loop. A Google search of the title 'Rumi - Past and Present, East and West' plus Brabazon gets 444,000 hits with no Brabazon mentioned. So he has never been discussed online in relation to this book. Cantos of wandering was published by Beacon Hill Press owned by Ross Keatings father in law, Bill Le Page. So self published. Your points in support are going round in circles, revolving around the Keating / Le Page axis of fan boy self publishing. His real notability is association with Meher Baba. The question is, is that enough? And the Elephant in the room is his article has No references, none at all. Why are we even discussing this? <b style="color:blue">Saint Aviator </b> <i style="color:blue">lets talk</i> 21:35, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Your underhanded attempts to ignore or downplay provided evidence is getting worse.
 * "The link above for the 'New Oxford Book of Australian Verse' lists his name on this article being discussed for deletion. A self fulfilling loop." Nope, just another red herring from you. The link above has nothing to do with Wikipedia. That book was published in 1986, well before Wikipedia started.
 * You claim to have run a google search and got "no Brabazon mentioned". (You looked through all 44,000 claimed hits did you?) Let's see what a real search gets.
 * Let's try as you write it above. 'Rumi - Past and Present, East and West' Brabazon gets 7,300 results, the 3rd one (google books) includes Brabazon. 7 of the first 10 do but some are false hits due to the lack of quote marks.
 * Let's try with quote marks "Rumi - Past and Present, East and West" Brabazon gets 7 results, the first one (google books) clearly includes Brabazon.
 * But why even try a google search? I've already provided the relevant link.
 * "So he has never been discussed online in relation to this book." How is that relevent? Another red herring from you. He was discussed in the book.
 * Cantos of Wandering "self published." How is that relevent? Another red herring from you. Self published books can get reviewed too.
 * None of the points I just made above revolve around Keating or Le Page so just another red herring from you.
 * "His real notability is association with Meher Baba." Says who? Another red herring from you. His real notability is from reviews and critisisms of his work.
 * "And the Elephant in the room is his article has No references, none at all." Another red herring from you. This afd is about the notability of Brabazon, not about the current state of the article. Why does it have no "references" at the moment? here it has 23 listed (but many are repeats). Someone must of removed them. Are the sources available, clearly yes and thats the relevant thing. Are there any sources in the article, yes, the publications and further reading are all sources even if they don't help with notability.
 * "Why are we even discussing this?" Because you choose not to listen.


 * Your strawman is looking very feeble. And you are still ignoring the offline sources. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:15, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

This is the Elephant Im talking about. Offline sources are OK BTW, I have used them too, but as stated above they need to be presented here properly, if you do it would trump the Google issue <b style="color:blue">Saint Aviator </b> <i style="color:blue">lets talk</i> 21:13, 23 March 2017 (UTC)


 * And now I've added a reference to the article so your imaginary elephant has left the room. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:18, 23 March 2017 (UTC)


 * You're starting to be uncivil, here, 'Your underhanded attempts' and directly above, dont. <b style="color:blue">Saint Aviator </b> <i style="color:blue">lets talk</i> 21:13, 23 March 2017 (UTC)


 * If you don't like that picture, how about this one (he is bottom right)? duffbeerforme (talk) 03:19, 23 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Its not a matter of like its about copyright. Again youre taking it to the personal. The editor who posted that picture was contacted about a copyright query and since then has commented above with a 'Delete' re the article. BTW as it happens I dont like that new picture. <b style="color:blue">Saint Aviator </b> <i style="color:blue">lets talk</i> 21:13, 23 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Sidney Nolan: A Life has a little bit more. More snippetts in Modern Love: The Lives of John and Sunday Reed  duffbeerforme (talk) 03:20, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Snippett. def. A bit, scrap, or morsel. Its four deletes to one keep. Hes just not notable enough. I put him on this page where there are 4 other Meher Baba affiliated pages you, Duffbeerforme, nominated for deletion, which I support BTW. Brabazon was a dedicated Meher Baba follower. <b style="color:blue">Saint Aviator </b> <i style="color:blue">lets talk</i> 23:08, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Luckily afds are not head counts. duffbeerforme (talk) 10:51, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, slakr  \ talk / 08:06, 24 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep. As per Duffbeerforme. Hoverfish Talk 11:08, 25 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment. To clarify, Duffbeerforme nominated some articles for deletion associated with Meher Baba like 69 Darshan, Jai Baba, Win Coates, Meher Babas Flag. They went. Also Bill Le Page was nominated and deleted. I went thru these articles and they were indeed weak in notability and references. So in the interests of maintaining what is best in this template I supported this move. They can always make a comeback with better references. I put some templates on some other articles in this template, like Kitty Davy. Meredith Starr to encourage the creators and perhaps other editors to lift the standard of the editing. This article in question could stay with some work, but its current form is weak. A whole rash of these articles were made which lack notability and with no real references like this one  and this one . But until these sorts of articles are deleted or fixed up they weaken the Meher Baba template whose core is very notable and well referenced and well written especially the Meher Baba article itself.  <b style="color:blue">Saint Aviator </b> <i style="color:blue">lets talk</i> 21:01, 25 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Reply If the main concern is the notability of this biography in respect to the Meher Baba template, the solution is to remove the article from the template. But this is not my concern here. I have read carefully Duffbeerforme's arguments about Brabazon's notability and I agree. I see evidence that this article can be an acceptable part of Wikipedia and I support keeping it. It is simply my opinion. As you see, I have not acted to protect any of the other articles you mentioned above, although they have all been in my watchlist. Hoverfish Talk 14:21, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes I see that. The deletion of the Bill Le Page article surprised me a little, but not much as I had been reducing it. I did not defend it however. Even so I looked around in the articles for deletion log for articles not on my watch list associated with the Meher Baba template. I was not surprised by the other articles I mentioned having been nominated and after consideration hurried them along. They were simply undefenedable. And there are others to come no doubt i.e. the two mentioned above. Regarding this one I was 50/50. Debate about it it is good. I would suport its retention if some better refs were included. <b style="color:blue">Saint Aviator </b> <i style="color:blue">lets talk</i> 21:19, 26 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep. Reversing vote after consideration. <b style="color:blue">Saint Aviator </b> <i style="color:blue">lets talk</i> 22:09, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Details of sources from AustLit.
 * general criticism
 * general criticism, unknown how musch is about Brabazon's work, may discuss The East-West Gathering
 * review of The East-West Gathering alongside 3 other reviews
 * review of The East-West Gathering
 * review of Cantos of Wandering alongside 4 other reviews
 * review of Cantos of Wandering alongside 12 other reviews
 * review of Seven Stars to Morning alongside 1 other review
 * review of Seven Stars to Morning alongside 5 other reviews
 * review of Proletarians-Transition alongside 5 other reviews
 * The second review of Proletarians-Transition does not provide enough details. duffbeerforme (talk) 10:49, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
 * review of Cantos of Wandering alongside 12 other reviews
 * review of Seven Stars to Morning alongside 1 other review
 * review of Seven Stars to Morning alongside 5 other reviews
 * review of Proletarians-Transition alongside 5 other reviews
 * The second review of Proletarians-Transition does not provide enough details. duffbeerforme (talk) 10:49, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
 * review of Seven Stars to Morning alongside 5 other reviews
 * review of Proletarians-Transition alongside 5 other reviews
 * The second review of Proletarians-Transition does not provide enough details. duffbeerforme (talk) 10:49, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
 * The second review of Proletarians-Transition does not provide enough details. duffbeerforme (talk) 10:49, 27 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep, as the subject was one of Meher Baba's closest disciples, worked closely with him, and wrote extensively about Baba and his thoughts, work, and principles. Prominent in his chosen field of endeavor. There now seem to be more than enough sources to form a Keep consensus. Randy Kryn 11:00, 27 March 2017 (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.