Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scott Cawelti


 * 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. Wizardman 16:57, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Scott Cawelti

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I found no significant coverage. Fails WP:PROF. SL93 (talk) 15:23, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

I strongly object to this proposed deletion. As someone who has created several pages and introduced many students to Wikipedia, I feel this page falls well within Wikipedia's guidelines for several reasons:

- Cawelti's work as a journalist and columnist is ongoing. He remains a contributing columnist to the Waterloo-Cedar Falls Courier. He is a public intellectual with an important regional presence.

- Brother's Blood is the definitive work to date on a significant murder case, an "infamous murder case" according to Chicago Tribune (http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2005-04-11/news/0504110183_1_crime-scene-bullets-evidence), subject of a recent television documentary/docudrama (http://wcfcourier.com/news/local/docudrama-recounts-mark-murders/article_e5c300cb-2052-564d-844d-1cf2ccd222ad.html), and developments in the case have been followed by newspapers including the LA Times (http://articles.latimes.com/2006/sep/10/news/adna-iowa10).

- Brother's Blood currently ranks #434,923 among Amazon.com sellers, which may not sound like much until you consider how many books are on Amazon.com. For example, Andrew Lih's The Wikipedia Revolution: How a Bunch of Nobodies Created the World's Greatest Encyclopedia is ranked #548,102. It goes without saying that Andrew Lih has a Wikipedia page devoted to him.

I ask for this nomination for deletion to be defeated. jim.oloughlin  —Preceding undated comment added 21:46, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I could care less about those things. None of that makes him pass WP:BIO. However, the murder case appears to be notable, but not himself. SL93 (talk) 22:03, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iowa-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:10, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:10, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:10, 22 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Neutral to Weak Delete -- the evidence is mixed. Brother's Blood does not come close to the standard of notability; held in only 43 libraries, nearly all of which are public libraries in Iowa. The significance of the murder does not convey notability on the book. (And ranking 400,000 on Amazon is still far along the long tail; it says that it has sold some copies, but not many; generally under a few hundred, if my own experience editing a NN book that reached 180,000 on Amazon is an indication). On the other hand, The Complete Poetry of James Hearst is certainly a notable book, held in nearly 200 libraries, including all of the most important research libraries. The question is, is that enough to convey notability not on the poet (which it definitely does) but on the editor? For a translator the answer would definitely be yes. For an editor of a selected works edition, possibly. But for a recently deceased university professor, I'm not sure that editing (while a lot of work and requiring creativity) conveys that level of notability; the editor would have to be specifically singled out for praise in a review, but an (admittedly quick) search does not turn up that. -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 21:49, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. The subject apparently fails both WP:PROF and WP:AUTHOR.  The murder case may be notable, but that notability is conferred neither to the book nor to its author.   Sławomir Biały  (talk) 20:09, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete According to WorldCat, the novel is only in 42 libraries, and that seems to be the primary basis of notability.  DGG ( talk ) 05:37, 29 July 2013 (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.