Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Iris Wedgwood


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 03:28, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Iris Wedgwood

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable writer who apparently was part of the British aristocracy. It is asserted that she published several novels and two nonfiction books, but I can find nothing that would make her and her work notable per WP:AUTHOR or WP:BK. It would appear that if the books did indeed exist, nobody ever took particular note of them. The most notable thing she appears ever to have done was to maintain a brief correspondence with Joseph Conrad. Unfortunately, this hardly merits an article. Qworty (talk) 05:53, 20 May 2011 (UTC)


 * There's a JSTOR review-- do you have a password? It appears her books do in fact exist. Trilliumz (talk) 13:11, 20 May 2011 (UTC)


 * "Merge" into her husband and childrens' articles. Merits a mention that Cicely, the early lady historian, and her brother John who got remarried to another early lady historian, grew up with a mom like Iris who had written 2 non-fiction books (one of which is still remembered), as well as several novels. Expanded article with what I could find quickly. It appears that major expansion of Lady Wedgwood's article would require research in print and password-protected sources, and it's not clear how much you'd find. Suggest we also leave a note and a link asking for someone to check on that JSTOR review.


 * If, of course, it were possible to devise suitable critieria for notability for WP:MOTHERS, this lady would certainly qualify :)


 * I'm going to tag this one for WikiProject Feminism-- for obvious reasons :) Trilliumz (talk) 13:38, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Question. What is an "early lady historian"? Cynwolfe (talk) 21:40, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
 * By "early" I was trying to get at the idea that there was a time before it was customary/de rigeur for almost all women to be economically self-supporting and/or work outside the home ... YMMV as to when that "women outside the home" break point takes place ... it has yet to happen in some parts. (Not hip to all the jargon of this field, hope I did not de-rail our point here. If I'd had the material in the commments below, I'd have opened the discussion with a vote for "Keep" instead.) Trilliumz (talk) 00:27, 21 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep, btw, she's not aristocratic but upper middle class. I do not know who user:Qworty is but his incompetence is staggering. And he is vandalising articles for some reason. He should be banned quite honestly. Flying Fische (talk) 17:01, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I also note that user:Qworty vandalised this article before he stupidly nominated it for deletion. Flying Fische (talk) 17:12, 20 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep She and her books were notable in their day, and once notable always notable. Even looking at the public page of the Jstor article, the review in The Geographical Journal of her Northumberland and Durham was two pages long. There also appear to be reviews of Fenland Rivers in The New Statesman, The Geographical Magazine, and The Illustrated London News . The necessity for library research to expand an article should never be a reason to delete it. Voceditenore (talk) 18:32, 20 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been notified to WikiProject Women's History – Voceditenore (talk) 18:43, 20 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  —Voceditenore (talk) 18:54, 20 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep I did a Google book search for "Iris Wedgwood" AND "The Iron Age" OR "Perilous Seas" OR "Fenland Rivers" OR "The Fairway" OR "The Livelong Day" . Her books are mentioned by American journal of archaeology, The Geographical Magazine, and others.  The Illustrated London news: Volume 188, Issue 2, 1936.  The Publisher: Volume 145, 1936.  Revue historique: Volume 178, 1967.  I added one references to the article.  There is evidence her books were reviewed, even if we don't have access to the full reviews.   D r e a m Focus  19:59, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment&mdash;In the worse case, this article should be merged with Sir Ralph Wedgwood, 1st Baronet, her husband. But I don't think that is necessary.&mdash;RJH (talk) 21:06, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep A notable author of both fiction and non-fiction books. More effort is likely to produce more reliable sources than have been added already. --DThomsen8 (talk) 21:55, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Now considerably improved in reliable sources. I changed the project templates to class=start, and added an England template. Keep!--DThomsen8 (talk) 22:21, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable author, though the article pays too much attention on her familial relationships. Dimadick (talk) 05:57, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - Novelist of the 1920s with 3 of her books out on the very mainstream publisher Hutchinson. There should be material on her in the long grass... Correspondent of Joseph Conrad.  Carrite (talk) 14:23, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment I have edited and expanded the article and removed the material conjecturing that she would have been proud of her daughter and that her "vocation as a novelist clearly influenced her abilities as a mother." This kind of padding is unwarranted. Her main books now have the full bibliographic information. Re her publishers, note that Faber & Faber who published Northumberland and Durham and William Morrow and Company who published the American edition of Fenland Rivers are no slouches either. Frankly, I'm a little unconvinced by the recent addition of a review in a non-notable blog which mentions Fenland Rivers in a review of a book by a completely different author, but never mind. Voceditenore (talk) 17:39, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Your expansion of the family's literary millieu does a great job of establishing a factual basis for how this mother-daughter situation produced 2 generations of published female authors. My additional points on notability would be: "Wrote practical non-fiction book still useful as of 2004. Prolific women writers of the 1920s and 1930s are notable on the basis of sheer persistence that opened the doors for other women." Trilliumz (talk) 22:09, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
 * As I said it's a relatively harmless link, but the mention seven years ago of this book as being useful by one person in his blog, does nothing to establish the author's notability. I also changed the description of the link in the footnote which had wrongly implied that the blog entry was a review of Wedgwood's book. It was the review of another book and hers was mentioned as one of two books which could provide information on the setting. Voceditenore (talk) 08:43, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete or merge (to husband's article). The article offers no indication of any particular notability as an author, and in fact barely touches on this aspect of the topic's life, being almost exclusively focused upon genealogical/society trivia, apparently indicating that her 'notability' was almost purely WP:INHERITED. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 11:08, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete or merge (to husband's article). Not so keen on the case thats presented here aside from the fact that WP:inherited in notability seems to come to mind for her works. Ottawa4ever (talk) 11:51, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep per voceditenore. Sources clearly establish her as notable per the guidelines at WP:Author.4meter4 (talk) 15:48, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. Based on the evidence presented by Voceditenore and Dream Focus. If her literary output were presented adequately in her husband's article, it would be susceptible to an off-topic tag, which in turn would point to a need for a legitimate content fork. Cynwolfe (talk) 16:29, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - Sources show notable author of the time period. CarolMooreDC (talk) 03:19, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep — sources and novels listed demonstrate notability. — Jonathan Bowen (talk) 11:12, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment: I would note that (i) notability has not been established under any specific criteria in WP:AUTHOR, (ii) keeping hammering "sources", "sources", "sources" is unavailing when few-to-none of these sources appear to address the topic's purported reason for notability (her literary career), nor appear to "address the subject directly in detail" & (iii) her "novels" do not add to her notability, only third-party coverage of them would. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 12:07, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * The reviews of her books (i.e. third party coverage) either require subscription, e.g., or research in an actual library. It doesn't mean they don't exist, and can't/won't be added as editors get hold of them. Numerous stub articles about authors begin this way. Voceditenore (talk) 12:51, 23 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep per Dream Focus and Voceditenore. It appears quite likely that Wedgwood meets WP:AUTHOR criteria 3, i.e. her work has been the subject of multiple reviews. Kaldari (talk) 23:05, 26 May 2011 (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.