Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Brandon (writer)


 * 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. czar ⨹   01:58, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

John Brandon (writer)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable. Fails WP:BLP. Jimsteele9999 (talk) 05:54, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 08:10, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 08:10, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 08:10, 24 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. A quick search shows that his work has been fairly substantially reviewed by the mainstream press, so he would pass under that qualification alone. Some of it is actually heavy enough to warrant articles for some of his books. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   05:42, 25 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. I've heard of his work, and it's well-reviewed. I think he's notable enough. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.196.241.150 (talk) 13:23, 25 November 2014‎


 * Comment Well, one person that's "heard of his work" does not notability make. Also does nothing to help discussion or debate here. Moreover, there isn't enough coverage on his books to meet WP:BK and wouldn't meet requirements even for a re-direct never mind an article. Although his work has been reviewed, that in itself is nowhere close to enough "qualifications alone" despite these "fairly substantially reviewed" books you mention, it still doesn't clear the hurtle of notability as none of his books meet any of the 5 criteria, for starters...Jimsteele9999 (talk) 02:42, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
 * All of his books have received coverage in reliable sources and the book reviews I added to the page was just the start of the coverage. I had some other stuff I needed to do (final semester projects and other WP pages) so I didn't bother adding the other stuff (plus I was planning on waiting on adding them, as I was just going to add them to the articles when I made them- I'm not a fan of tossing a ton of sources on a page as a placeholder unless I'm making the article right then and there). I normally don't WP:TROUT editors, but coverage wasn't exactly hard to find and seven reviews in reliable sources was plenty enough to show notability- although I'm in the process of adding more since I do plan on writing articles for most of his works. I figure that the reviews can sit there until I have the time to make the articles in question, plus it kind of does show exactly how very notable this guy is in the literary world. I'll admit that I'd never heard of him before this AfD, but that doesn't mean that he isn't notable. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   05:18, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Since I dislike clutter on pages, I've went ahead and made stub entries for three of his works. They need to be fleshed out by people who have read the books, but there are enough reviews to warrant them having articles per WP:NBOOK. I want to note that before I migrated most of the sources to the applicable articles, there were 32 sources on the article. Two of those were for awards that he was nominated for and about eight were interviews or articles about him, but 22 reviews are more than enough to assert notability for an author. (I'd removed the last primary source from the page, so all of the sources are independent of Brandon.) Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   08:40, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I also figured that I should add that an author does not have to have articles for his or her books in order to pass notability guidelines. There has been more than enough precedent at AfD (even during this past year) where we've kept articles for authors despite their books not receiving enough coverage to merit an article separate from the main page. If the guy had only received trade reviews then I wouldn't argue so hard for notability, but these are mainstream reviews and articles from some of the most major newspapers, websites, and magazines in the United States. (AV Club, Arkansas Times, New York Times, Vogue magazine, Sydney Morning Herald) Even if the books didn't have enough coverage for their own articles (even though they do), throwing an entire article out because we can't write an article for each book- despite having dozens of independent, in-depth, and reliable sources for the guy overall... that's really kind of the opposite of what we should be doing on Wikipedia. An author can have notability without having separate book articles and AfD has set at least a good dozen precedents in the last few years for this, if not more than that. I don't mean to sound like I'm getting WP:BITE-y, but I'm very bothered by the fact that your argument comes across to me as saying that the original amount of reviews and articles alone wouldn't be enough (six reviews in mainstream, non-trivial sources and one article) and that notability for an author boils down to whether or not we can create articles for their books. That's a little too exclusionist for my tastes and far more exclusionist than what the current guidelines require. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   11:55, 28 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep The references are solid. It is a bit early in this writer's career, but I don't think it is WP:TOOSOON because he has already won awards. LaMona (talk) 01:47, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
 * He didn't win them, he was just nominated for them and nominations can't count towards notability. I added them sort of as a lark since they were by such large organization (American Library Association and the New York Public Library), plus it was something I was going to add to the book page. In any case, he's received more than enough book reviews to pass part three of WP:AUTHOR (The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, that has been the subject of ... multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.) Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   11:44, 28 November 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.