Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Dunning (journalist)


 * 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 speedy keep. Withdrawn by nominator Philg88 ♦talk 04:56, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

John Dunning (journalist)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Doesn't meet WP:AUTHOR or WP:GNG. There is another notable writer called John Dunning, which made results difficult to obtain. Boleyn (talk) 18:51, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:58, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:58, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Luxembourg-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:58, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:58, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:58, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:58, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:58, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JAaron95  &#40; Talk &#41;  14:50, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. According to the Wikipedia article, his books sold more than 15 million copies and he became "by far, Luxembourg's most prolific author", so there is assertion of importance.  He was an author primarily, so the parenthetical disambiguation in the article title should not be "journalist";  article should be moved to "John Dunning (True Crime author)" (or perhaps "(Luxembourg author)" or "(law and order writer)" or "(true crime writer)").
 * His stories were lead ones in True Detective (magazine) and other true crime mags...according to a Yahoo question (not a reliable source but) "Dunning wrote true crime stories for True Detective and other true crime magazines in the 70's and 80's. His story was usually the opening one in each magazine and almost as a rule, it dealt with some titillating Euro crime of passion". Supported by his being first author listed for a 1972 issue of True Detective per this Amazon used book for sale item.
 * He appears in Dictionnaire des Autours Luxembourgeois: see his bio in Dictionnaire des Autours Luxembourgeois. (source not yet used in article;  I notice it lists at least one more work by him: "Truly Murderous. Horrific modern European murders reconstructed").
 * There is what appears to be a feature article about him. It was published March 22, 1990 while the author died November 1990.  "Un éminent sinologue et citoyen du monde. À la mémoire de John Dunning, écrivain luxembourgeois de langue anglaise". In: Die Warte-Perspectives 22.03.1990, by Fernand Hoffmann.  It is categorized in genre: "Divers > Compte-rendu, portrait d'auteur, interview".  Google translates title as "An eminent sinologist and global citizen. In memory of John Dunning, Luxembourg writer of English. In: Die - Warte Outlook 22.03.1990".
 * Per this, Dunning is apparently also covered in Hoffman's "Geschichte der Luxemburger Mundartdichtung" which Google translates to "History of Luxembourg dialect poetry" or maybe that is "History of Luxembourg writing" or something more general than "poetry". Dunning is one of the 123 authors mentioned.  Hoffman's work includes "First volume : From the beginnings to Michel Rodange . Second volume : From Aendréi Duchscher to the present. With a bibliography of Carlo Hury and a preface by Prof. Dr Hugo Moser" (also translated by Google)
 * Interestingly, in a critique of true crime: "Sometimes bad things happen but it isn’t the writer’s fault. The late John Dunning, for example, used to legitimately buy the basis of his crime stories from an agency. One day he received a letter from another crime writer pointing out that his dates were often wrong. John checked with the agency– and they admitted that they’d thought modern crime stories sold better than older ones, so were adding twenty years to each date!" That is in "Shots", an e-zine:  "True Crime: The Good, the Bad & The Ugly" by Carol Anne Davis.
 * Wikipedia coverage of True crime genre is not great...impossible to tell if Dunning was an important leader, but possible. More sources likely, say in books about the genre.
 * Article was tagged by the deletion nominator in March for COI, for the wikipedia article creator appearing to be a SPA. But that was harsh, seems unfounded, looking at Johnnychips' contributions, a beginning wikipedia writer not showing specific knowledge (unsure if British is right or wrong nation) back in 2008.  Everyone is an SPA in their first edits!  I am removing that tag about COI now.
 * It seems to me to be a good service to distinguish between this John Dunning vs. the one who wrote detective novels. Amazon and other places mix them up together.  It's not required but it is nice when Wikipedia provides definitive clarification on something not understood properly in the world.
 * -- do ncr  am  20:21, 25 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep. ".. results difficult to obtain." Oh dear, very sorry. But that's hardly a good reason to delete. A dozen books? All quite popular, I would imagine. And all in a Random House imprint? Hardly self-published, is he? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:12, 25 June 2015 (UTC) p.s. 15 million???
 * Comment, there is never any need to be rude and sarcastic to other editors here. I mentioned that there was another writer of the same name so others would be warned that there would be some false positives; not as a reason that this article should be deleted. You could have made the same points in a neutral or collegiate manner. Withdrawing nom per . Thanks for your hard work, Boleyn (talk) 06:29, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
 * The context of your comment made your intentions rather unclear. That seemed (and still seems) to be a reason for your nomination. You think this is "rude" by typical Wikipedia standards? I'm sorry if you really find a little sarcasm so hurtful. But my comment was directed at only one editor, not editors in general. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:10, 27 June 2015 (UTC) p.s. 15 million???


 * 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.