Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/L. E. Barrett


 * 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 delete. The only significant point of contention here is whether the interview in the Boston Globe is a good enough source. WP:INTERVIEW gives some (not strictly policy) advice on that question, but the bottom line is people here at this AfD did not feel the source(s) were sufficient. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:07, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

L. E. Barrett

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable individual. I am unable to find any substantial coverage of this person in reliable sources. The article is written by the subject as can be seen by looking at the image licensing information. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:00, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 13:54, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 13:54, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 13:54, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maine-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 13:54, 16 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete Not notable, per nom. JoJo Anthrax (talk) 17:49, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Nom asserts that he "unable to find any substantial coverage of this person in reliable sources"  , but the article has linked citations to some WP:RS, some are local, but at least one, Bringing wilds of Maine to the table, a Q & A author interview in the Boston Globe is a major, non-local, big-city daily.E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:37, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete interviews do not show notability, they are not counted as indepdent sources, and do not add towards GNG.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:45, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
 * An interview in a WP:RS such as a major big-city daily newspaper certainly counts towards notability.E.M.Gregory (talk) 21:44, 19 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep The article can be improved, but E.M.Gregory has demonstrated the existence of RS directly covering the subject. Davey2116 (talk) 22:22, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete I am skeptical that the articles can be improved - because sufficient sourcing does not seem to exist.  Author who has written 2 novels, either self-published or with a very small press.  One got a single review in a local paper, which I added to article.  Some books  of poetry and essays, no sources found.  And three books about food/cooking in Maine: one on blueberries, one on dandelions, and one on Fiddlehead ferns.  Full  disclosure: I enjoy and eat all of these foods, especially Maine wild blueberries (intensely better than farmed blueberries.) 2 of these food books sank witout a trace, but the third, Fiddlemainia generated feature stories in USA Today  and  the Boston Globe, as well as at least four feature stories in Maine newspapers, but these are more about the fern than about the authors.   I looked for additional sources, diligently.  but despite my pro-fiddlehead prejudices (very fresh ones, lightly steamed, are delicious) I cannot see enough SIGCOV here to justify keeping under WP:BASIC or WP:AUTHOR.E.M.Gregory (talk) 23:19, 20 February 2018 (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.