Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Graham Diamond (2nd nomination)


 * 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   no consensus. Cirt (talk) 08:24, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Graham Diamond
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Unsourced BLP that was kept at the previous AFD in early 2006 but with little discussion and with only one editor strongly in favour of keeping. I found no significant coverage of the author or his books, so I think a second look is in order.--Michig (talk) 16:01, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:51, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Neutral Weak delete . Sufficient evidence of fact of moderately wide publication, but none of award, wide reviews, etc., even in niche genre. LotLE × talk  19:43, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Science Fiction/Fantasy is not exactly a niche genre. Fact of fairly wide publication of several novels, article in need of addition not deletion. Amentet (talk) 19:18, 8 February 2010 (UTC)


 * "Fairly wide publication" is not among the criteria that determine a notable author. Yappy2bhere (talk) 22:44, 8 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you for pointing out the guideline. I still find the creation of multiple novels to be more noteworthy criteria than the possession of breasts and appearance in one issue of Playboy magazine that the same guideline page references as being a criteria guideline for being noteworthy. Amentet (talk) 23:25, 8 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Opinions differ, but yours is a heterodox opinion with respect to WP:GNG. Yappy2bhere (talk) 01:26, 9 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep There is enough notability to be included. Having said that; the article needs extensive editing to address issues. --Stormbay (talk) 21:11, 9 February 2010 (UTC)


 * There is? According to which criteria? Yappy2bhere (talk) 00:50, 10 February 2010 (UTC)


 * He has had over a dozen books published and they sell well. Granted, Fantasy is not a classy genre but Diamond appears to have produced a body of work over a period of time that speaks to his notability. Stormbay (talk)


 * Did I disparage fantasy fiction? Apologies. What I meant to say was, I don't understand how even a large body of work satisfies WP:AUTHOR if no other author has commented on them. Am I misreading the guideline? Yappy2bhere (talk) 08:05, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget  00:30, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Weak Keep His most widely held book is his most recent, Forest wars, (1995), held in    136 WorldCat libraries. . I found 3   reviews:    , and  (based on the information listed in GNews Archive.)  I conclude from this that he was just sufficiently notable   :  I did get his birthdate from the LC authority file and added it to the article.    DGG ( talk ) 17:56, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Are you sure they are reviews of Diamond's books? SF/Fantasy isn't exactly a genre where authors don't receive any coverage, so I would have expected more if he really is/was notable.--Michig (talk) 18:08, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * it's extremely difficult to judge notability of sf as one goes further back. The intensity of coverage of sf in mainstream sources at present was not the case 20 years ago, and the specialized sources that were available were not in general collected much by libraries. Given copyright, it will be a very long time before the googles cover the period.    DGG ( talk ) 04:02, 16 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom, notability in this case is on the weak side. I'm not comfortable retaining biographical articles on authors who lack significant coverage just because a couple of their books were reviewed.   JBsupreme  ( talk ) 19:57, 17 February 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.