Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Strawberry Saroyan


 * 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. John254 19:08, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Strawberry Saroyan

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

Subject does not satisfy wikipedia criteria for notability of creative professionals. Being the author of one book and a columnist is not sufficient given the requirement that the subject should be "regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by their peers or successors" and should have "played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, which has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews". I just don't see it --- contested prod so here we are. Bigdaddy1981 (talk) 18:14, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Check the references. They are "multiple independent periodical articles or reviews" and therefore she's notable. --Eastmain (talk) 19:45, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.   —Eastmain (talk) 19:45, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.   —Eastmain (talk) 19:45, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - my reading of the guidelines is that the work has to be considered significant and or well-known in addition to having multiple reviews. Not just having reviews. Note: "significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, which has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews" -- the *which* implies that both - not just one - are required. I see no evidence that the single publication satisfies the requirement. Bigdaddy1981 (talk) 20:52, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. The multiple reviews in major publications are precisely what demonstrate that the subject's book is a "significant or well-known work". Phil Bridger (talk) 08:31, 2 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep. She is a legitimate author with a book out from mega-publisher Random House, which is no small feat.  The book has been reviewed in plenty of secondary WP:RS: .  She clearly meets WP:BK.  A writer doesn't need to have the influence of Hemingway to qualify for a WP article.  It's quite sufficient to have a powerhouse publisher and legitimate industry reviews.  She's definitely a keeper, with her other publications adding to her notability, and in fact the article should be expanded. Qworty (talk) 03:13, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * keep notable author. JoshuaZ (talk) 17:07, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Has plenty of significant coverage in reliable sources. Phil Bridger (talk) 08:31, 2 May 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.