Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/M Sarki


 * 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. --Sam Blanning(talk) 16:07, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

M Sarki
Non-notable poet published by print-on-demand publisher Authors Choice Press. Probable vanity page by new editor.
 * Delete as per my nom.  Dl yo ns 493   Ta lk  23:21, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

In rebuttal: M Sarki's book ZIMBLE ZAMBLE ZUMBLE (ISBN: 0595250920) was published in a limited-edition-handmade edition by elimae books of Dallas, TX. A paperback trade edition was published by Author's Choice Press. Authors Choice Press offers an important service to writers whose books have gone out-of-print. They are a subsidy of I-Universe.
 * Keep

M Sarki's book LITTLE WAR MACHINE (ISBN: 0972332979) was published in a paperback trade edition by Ravenna Press out of Edmonds, Washington.

M Sarki's MEWL HOUSE (ISBN# 0-9770377-1-1) was published in a limited-handmade edition by Rogue Literary Society.

A poet cannot be listed in Poets and Writers if the journals and book publishers do not check out. M Sarki is listed in Poets and Writers. Perhaps this person accusing M Sarki of being a vanity writer has some bone to pick with the poet.

To say that M Sarki is not a notable poet would tell me that this person does not know poetry, nor the movers in it. Roguebooks 00:37, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * The user has less than 40 edits, majority of them to M Sarki and this AfD. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 09:33, 31 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete,WP:NN, likely WP:VANITY. All a writer must do to be listed in Poets & Writers is fill out an application. I completed it in less than six minutes. I direct your attention to: P&W Application. In regards to Sarki's published works, self-published works are considered vanity. If there are other published works, are there ISBNs for the works? In addition, the list of published works in the article link to non-literary pages. I was unable to locate any literary publications by the names listed. M Sarki is not a notable poet, not yet. -Colonial One 01:32, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Roguebooks 02:07, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Every link in the journal listings now work. Please check them out. Also, a Google search for M Sarki will show countless publications where the poet's work has been published. As for the books, there are isbn numbers for every work published by M Sarki. (See above titles with added ISBN numbers.)  Sarki was nominated for a 2003 Pushcart Prize .  There have been critical reviews written about the poetry (see elimae.com.


 * This is not a vote, so votestuffing is pointless. Even more so if you make it plainly obvious that you're voting multiple times... --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 09:33, 31 July 2006 (UTC)


 * If these personal (and idiotic) attacks are what Wikipedia is about, then Sarki won't want to be a part of this anyway. To think it may be you two people who decide whether Sarki is a notable poet, or not, seems ludicrous. Better to be gone than be a part of this. It is hoped Wikipedia's people can see through your pointless attacks and check the real poet out. Nobody is votestuffing, simply trying to learn the system here and defend a simply factual encyclopedic entry.Roguebooks 14:01, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Please do not take AfDs personally, and calm down. This is hardly constructive. We're not here to attack the subject any way, we're only discussing whether or not the subject is notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia. Statements for or against are duly noted. (And if you're not votestuffing, please explain the two extraneous keep comments above. You only need to state your recommendation once - perhaps you just weren't aware of that fact?) --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 14:36, 31 July 2006 (UTC)


 * didn't know they were votes. meant as statements. declarations. since removed. excessive editing caused by unfamiliarity with system. i fail to see any statements above that are constructive, except the facts listed by "roguebooks". there is no basis for any of the statements above by "deleters". every question has been answered and fixed. nobody, obviously, has checked them out to their facticity and offered revisions to their prior views. i do believe the attacks have been personal because there are judgments being made by others who have offered up no credibility in this field. M Sarki is also a Finn.Roguebooks 19:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment we appreciate the referencing done in the article. Nobody is attacking the article, we're trying to come to an impartial conclusion on whether it is notable enough to be a Wikipedia entry.  The books clearly exist but they all are with small publishers with limited distibution (out-of-print, paperback trade edition, limited-handmade edition).  Nomination for a prize is some claim to notability - how prestigious is the prize and what's the status of the nominator?  Nobody has bone to pick with Mr Sarki. I do have some reservations about this being a promotional campaign by Roguebooks.  Dl yo ns 493   Ta lk


 * How can the M Sarki main page be misconstrued as "promotional" when all it states are the facts? If you research and read what many others have said about Sarki you could come to the conclusion that there is some merit here to the claims on the "articles for deletion" page that Sarki is in fact "notable". The mere fact that Lish is involved with the poet ought to tell you something, unless you are not familiar with Gordon Lish, and then there is absolutely no reason for your remarks to be merited. There are many writers out there who wish not to be involved with big publishers. There are some writers who do not care about money, nor do they care about rubbing elbows with their ilk. This page on M Sarki is only offered as a link to persons interested in finding out more about the poet. It certainly is not about prestige. It is certainly not about self-promotion. For what? It is becoming all too clear that this Wikipedia is a community of something other than what it claims to be. Roguebooks 21:42, 31 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep With Pushcart nomination, the author is clearly noteable. As for self-published: Walt Whiltman self-published Leaves of Grass and more recently Christopher Paolini's Eragon (Inheritance, Book I) began as a do-it-yourself before Knopf picked it up.  Jdlow 20:08, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Always good to see a new user taking an interest in AfD.  What's a Pushcart nomination and should I AfD this self-published Whiltman guy?  Dl yo ns 493   Ta lk  02:34, 1 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Pushcart Prize Roguebooks 09:14, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Thanks for that link. As I read it, any small press can make up to 6 nominations annually.  For some small presses that'd be pretty much their annual output. Thousands of writers have received an award so I'm not sure that even receiving an award (let alone merely being nominated for one) would represent widespread notability.  But it's certainly a step in that direction!  Note that, as far as I can see, Sarki is an interesting poet and one who probably deserves wider recognition but the nature of Wikipedia is to record the already famous rather than the deserving.   Dl yo ns 493   Ta lk

"Yeats wrote, 'Words alone are certain good.' Read Sarki and experience the truth of what Yeats wrote." — Frank Lentricchia           Roguebooks 14:47, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Try this new link. Frank Lentricchia solicited Sarki for some poems he could publish in Duke's SAQ periodical. Sarki obliged. Lentricchia wrote the following for Sarki's book LITTLE WAR MACHINE. Is that notable? If it isn't, nothing is. Learn who Lentricchia is. Then, let's talk.

"If the poems in Zimble Zamble Zumble [elimae books, 2000 had been previously published in The Paris Review or The New Yorker, M Sarki would by now have been hailed as a marvelous home-grown successor to Charles Simic and the book itself offered by Knopf or Farrar Straus. But the poems have instead appeared mostly in online magazines, such as elimae and 5_Trope, and Sarki is virtually unknown. Which may be just as well, for the time being, because the comparison to Simic would be misleading and maybe even harmful. For one thing Sarki's poems owe more to the not quite Dadaist tendencies of Wallace Stevens than to European surrealism; for another, Simic would give his third eye to write poems as wonderful and delicious as the best of these. I frequently have no idea what Sarki is talking "about," but his language both astonishes and amuses me. Zimble Zamble Zumble gives more pleasure than the last dozen Pulitzer Prize winners all together."
 * More notes: The critic B. Renner wrote this piece for elimae about M Sarki. On that page there is also a piece by Gordon Lish about Sarki and how he compares him to the great American poet Wallace Stevens.

--B. Renner]

One other thing: The Pushcart Prize allows six nominees from each approved publication (journal), of which there can be as many as twelve issues or one per quarter. That means there can be as many as hundreds of pieces to choose from in each journal to literally thousands. (There was one poem nominated of Sarki's out of who-knows-how-many others.) Obviously this person discounting the Pushcart Prize nomination does not know what he/she is talking about. It is a fine, and very prestigious academy. It is a disservice to all writers to discount it. Roguebooks 18:07, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Roguebooks 20:37, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Something else notable from Canadian novelist and short story writer Ken Sparling: Ken Sparling Interview Ken Sparling: The exquisite poet and venerable human being M. Sarki once emailed me a quote that shifted something inside me, almost violently. I liked the feeling. I'd felt it before, and I hope I'll feel it again. I emailed back to him and said, “That's beautiful, Sark, but what the hell does it mean?” He emailed back and admitted he had no good idea what it meant, but he said he thought it had something to do with getting the words wrong. Which didn't actually clarify much for me, but made me love Sarki even more.>>>The Danforth Review


 * Delete - Putting on one side the fact that I don't understand a word of his poetry the key pount is that he doesn'r seem to have established notability. BlueValour 04:21, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete no notability demonstrated.--Peta 09:10, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
 *  Delete or Keep with major rewrite Notability not established. Also, the article is lacking details. Is his first name "M" or is "M Sarki" an assumed identifier like "Prince?" Where and when was he born and raised? What cultural influences and other factors led him to write what he wrote? Did he attend college? There is only a reference to someone's "tutelage." Consider if the "John Keats" article were as lacking in details as this one. Include more to establish notoreity and provide some info about the person. Whether his poems make sense to a self appointed Wikipedia article reader/deleter is irrelevant.Edited to add: "Woodshed" is awesome. Great poems appear sometimes on refrigerators in the form of little magnets, no? Edison 21:50, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Note Edison's recommendation has been changed by anon 71.228.11.251

What it originally said was:Delete or major rewrite Dl yo ns 493   Ta lk   00:16, 4 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete The reason "notability" and "vanity" are invoked as criteria for deletion is less that they are an extension of "WP:NOT an indiscriminate collection" then because of real concerns that the subject of the article is so obscure that he/she/it will in all likelihood not attract a good mix of involved, semi-involved and univolved editors. Chances are the article will always stand as a POV piece written solely by partisan editors with a strong involvement with the subject, failing WP:NPOV and often WP:V and WP:NOR to boot. This article is a perfect example why notability should be a concern. It's a gush piece, it's scraping the bottom of the barrel with a rusty spoon what reliable sources are concerned, and it's even signed by the main author who seems to be the publisher of the subject's poetry if not in fact the subject him/herself. ~ trialsanderrors 22:07, 4 August 2006 (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.