Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sheldon Jaffery


 * 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   keep. seresin ( ¡? )  20:13, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Sheldon Jaffery

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

Notability and referenced tagged since June 2007. While others may have cited Jaffery's work, no one seems to have taken the time to write about Mr. Jaffery himself. There does not appear to be enough reliable, third-party published sources independent of the subject and with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy to maintain an independent article on this topic. -- Suntag  ☼  07:47, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. (see comment below) For academics and bibliographers, having your work cited is what makes you notable in your field. The fact he wrote those books is easy to check as are the birth and death dates. I see no reason to delete this article. - Mgm|(talk) 08:47, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * After DGG's comments I changed my !vote to a strong keep. - Mgm|(talk) 10:09, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. I've added a reference to a brief article about Jaffery in The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction, ed. Peter Nicholls and John Clute. It also appears that at least one of his books is discussed in Michael Burgess's Reference Guide to Science Fiction, Fantasy and Horror, though I don't have it (some info is visible in snippet view in Google Books). Mike Christie (talk) 10:59, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Just as baseball players are notable for playing baseball, writers are notable for writing. If all we have about a writer is biography and nothing about the writing, it's that sort of article that doesn't show notability. It is however necessary to show the books are notable. It is not number of publications alone that does it. In this case, they are mostly published by a major publisher in the field, and they are each held in over 100 libraries according to worldcat; between them, that's sufficient. .  Further, and this is important in any field, there's an entry for him in a standard encyclopedia--though I'd like page numbers there.  DGG (talk) 19:27, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I took the Nicholls/Clute entry from a CD version of the encyclopedia, which is why there's no page number. I can add the page number this coming weekend, when I get back to the place where my print copy is. Mike Christie (talk) 21:29, 27 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.