Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Lemon (author)


 * 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. v/r - TP 17:01, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Mark Lemon (author)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Not notable. Look at creator's talk page--he's tried it in half a dozen different ways, and I guess sheer volume (see the article history) is the only reason it wasn't speedied. Anyway, not a notable author, no reviews, no significant coverage except for a few small newspaper articles. Drmies (talk) 04:36, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete and salt Not a notable author; all I can find (using all the bookseller resources at my disposal) is one co-author credit for a book of photographs published through the highly specialist McWhiney Foundation. His proposed other two books aren't even on the radar, and most publishers list this information up to a year before the proposed release date. Page would be more appropriate as a redirect to the genuinely notable Mark Lemon. Recommend salting the page to prevent this SPA creator from repeatedly recreating it against consensus. Yunshui (talk) 07:15, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Very weak keep but in stub form without all the excessive detail. WorldCat shows that The illustrated Alamo, 1836 : a photographic journey is being distributed by an academic press and is housed in 124 libraries. Lady  of  Shalott  12:51, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * It was reviewed in Wild West, Feb2011, Vol. 23 Issue 5, p73-73, 1/5p. Lady  of  Shalott  13:05, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment The criteria at WP:AUTHOR require that he:
 * be regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors.
 * be known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique.
 * has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, that has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.
 * has work which has either (a) become a significant monument, (b) been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) won significant critical attention, or (d) been represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums.
 * At present the only criterion he stands a chance of passing is no. 3, and one review in a specialist periodical does not, to my mind, constitute "a significant or well-known work" with coverage in "multiple independent periodical articles". Yunshui (talk) 13:12, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Lady, has it come to this? Will we be split by a lemon wedge unaccompanied by gin or tonic? I'm sad. Do you have a link for the Wild West? I'm interested in looking at that review. If his book has been the subject of significant reviews in notable publications then I might start singing a different tune. With my apologies for mixing metaphors and drinks. And grammar. Also for syllepsis. Drmies (talk) 16:22, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll see if I can get the full thing to open for me here. I was only able to see the abstract at home. I'll probably have to email it to you if I can open it. Lady  of  Shalott  17:25, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, what I thought was an abstract was actually the full text. Check your email, Drmies. Vote revised to very weak keep. Lady  of  Shalott  17:33, 8 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete for reasons listed by Yunshui. Not enough info or notability to really warrant keeping. He's released one book that has very little notability as it is and has done nothing that would be notable beyond that. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 12:56, 8 September 2011 (UTC)tokyogirl79
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  Lady  of  Shalott  13:15, 8 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Strong delete Totally non-notable author. Also suggest warning article creator for COI again. Jason Quinn (talk) 22:07, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - as product advertising, although it's difficult to tell from this stubbed out remnant. I had to go back to an earlier version to see what all the fuss was about and found a very detailed and promotional piece, with this tucked in at the end: "Tony Caridi - In August of 2011 Tony Caridi, the director of marketing and public relations for the Alamo, agreed to represent Mark Lemon and create a brand product and intellectual properties licensing of all Mark Lemon works, including printing, publishing and imaging rights." Oh, now I get it. Fails GNG. Carrite (talk) 14:30, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, when I removed it from the article it even had an image of them shaking hands on the agreement! &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  17:28, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete I tried to clean up this article a while back thinking there might be some notability somewhere and then asked Drmies to take a look. After a few weeks I haven't been able to find anything significant (except the AJC source which provides some background info) and the Lady's finding of a mini-review doesn't sway my opinion either. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  17:28, 14 September 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.