Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Russell Trainer


 * 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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit  13:37, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Russell Trainer

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Created without sources in 2010 (Special:Permalink/351674872), and I couldn't find any that cover him in-depth or verify any biographical information. His name is mentioned in several sources with relation to his 1966 book The Lolita Complex (specifically a 1969 translation) as the source of the Japanese usage, but that is about all I can find (and I don't think the book is notable enough for an article either; I added Stapleton 2016, which gives a very brief description, and apparently there was a very short review, or perhaps just an ad, in The NYT Book Review in 1966 ). I was unable to find any information about his other books, which based on the titles and what the article says appear to be erotic pulp paperbacks and faux "case studies" in the vein of The Lolita Complex.

"None of his publishers is known to have ever supplied a biography, but Russell Trainer's family states..." from the first revision makes me think that the editor who wrote this was perhaps a family friend conducting original research. — Goszei (talk) 06:38, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. — Goszei (talk)  06:38, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. — Goszei (talk)  06:38, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  13:19, 9 October 2021 (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.