Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scott Hamilton (writer)


 * 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.  kur  ykh   02:01, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Scott Hamilton (writer)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Notability Bonfire of vanities (talk) 03:59, 26 October 2008 (UTC) I can find no evidence of Notability and it appears that this page has been speedily deleted in the past. Bonfire of vanities (talk) 04:08, 26 October 2008 (UTC)


 * delete ugh, people who need to write about themselves. Potatoswatter (talk) 08:02, 26 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Save Scott did not create this page, I did, in accordance with Wiki guidelines. Scott's blog is in the 22nd most-read blog in NZ and the only genuinely left-wing blog to counter the many right-wing blogs that flood the cyber-ways. I say keep this entry. He's an excellent writer, think W.H. Auden at his least reverential. A definite guy to watch, and highly influential by people in NZ and in the (Chomsky-Flynn-Social Democrat and further left) web-world. Cheers, Sherry Hamid. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.150.120.30 (talk) 17:49, 26 October 2008 (UTC)  — 202.150.120.30 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Delete. I don't see clear evidence of notability. The blogging would only make him notable if it was a very well-known website and I don't know if 'independently published' means 'self-published', or if the book sold a copy. There aren't references to show notability. The originial title was Scott Hamilton (NZ poet and essayist). This user has created several pages on Titus publishing and their writers, many of which have been deleted or PRODded and then not taken further when someone removed the PROD. (talk) 09:40, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 12:13, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 12:13, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 12:14, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * god! who doesn't have a political blog now? I don't think he makes the cut. Interesting blog, though, plan 8 (talk) 12:22, 26 October 2008 (UTC)


 * SAVE: I don't see the problem, Scott reviews widely in international socialist papers, reviews online for Scoop review of books, has published a collection of poetry with a well-known New Zealand publisher and operates one of the most popular blogs in New Zealand, which also gets an international readership. If people want to wiki him to know more then he needs an entry up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.255.59.230 (talk) 20:37, 26 October 2008 (UTC)  — 123.255.59.230 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Delete Vanispamcruftisement. It appears that the subject of the article writes, but is not written about.  This is the critical element to having a biographical article on the subject.  And a good rule of thumb is: if they have to come here to learn about him, we shouldn't have an article. Protonk (talk) 06:56, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * To clarify, that's if they have to, ie have no other options, as opposed to simply wanting to. Potatoswatter (talk) 17:05, 28 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Save reviews, translations and references now reinforce notability. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.150.124.135 (talk) 00:23, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Not really. Most of those are on his own blog or his publisher's website. To me this is "trivial coverage" and does not seem to meet the notability guidelines for Authors or  Academics. Bonfire of vanities (talk) 04:39, 29 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete no clear evidence of notability. Looking at the contributions of the user who created the article, and the discussion here, it appears to be a possible COI. NZ forever (talk) 21:13, 30 October 2008 (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.