Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Paul John Dykes

POINT RAISED:

Writer of sports biographies, which appear to have been well received (e.g. mentioned in Scotsman'' book lists) but are essentially narrow fan-interest publications, about notable subjects but of little notability themselves."

RESPONSE:

These publications are not "narrow fan-interest" items. They include an authorised biography about a Scottish international World Cup player, and a Scottish football captain, who managed clubs in America and Australia.

Each book has been published by separate publishers, and they are not fan or self-published.

In terms of being notable works, two have been named in a national newspaper's end-of-year merit list, and the other was adapted into a feature-length documentary (as listed on IMDB).'''

POINT RAISED:

"Although the article cites several reliable sources, they are mainly news items of the "a book about a notable subject has been published" variety, rather than carrying any particular coverage of Mr Dykes, so I'm inclined to think it fails WP:AUTHOR. To be honest, I suspect a degree of promotion (possibly self-promotion) behind this article, as its creator's editing other than on this article is almost exclusively limited to the subjects of Mr Dykes' books."

RESPONSE:

On the subject of the edits being around one subject, my interest lies in Celtic literature, and the subjects written about here (The Quality Street Gang, Neil Mochan & Andy Lynch) all have Wikipedia pages that include references to their respective biographies and autobiographies. By expanding on the subject of the author in this case, readers of Wikipedia are able to research further, each of the respective publications. It is not relevant that I, as someone who has taken the time to make factual edits to this site, has done so exclusively to one subject. This is not something that should prevent me or other users from making updates (exclusivity of subject) unless there is a term of use preventing them from doing so.

To further speculate that I have done this as self-promotion would suggest an accusation that I am indeed Paul John Dykes. This is an unfounded accusation and not one that I take lightly. These updates about a notable, three-times-published, author and documentary producer are in keeping with the terms of Wikipedia (which were fully read and understood in relation to notability etc).

On the contrary, the reason that you wish for these articles to be removed would appear to be self-motivated, as they deal solely in speculation (that you believe the author to be the subject).

POINT RAISED:

Until I removed them, it also included unsourced personal info, such as date of birth, and a link to a commercial Celtic books website. Jellyman (talk) 19:36, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

RESPONSE:

Perhaps the DOB information was unsourced, but it was factually accurate and obtained from other online sources (Amazon and IMDB).

In terms of the link to a webpage, again perhaps poor edits on my part, but this was a link to this author's publisher's homepage, and no more a commercial effort to sell books than any other link to an official website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HummingbirdSong (talk • contribs) 09:11, 4 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your comments. When responding to an articles for deletion debate, you need to place your comments directly on the nomination page, not its talk page. I have copied your comments across, editing out only my original text, I hope you'll agree I have done so accurately. Jellyman (talk) 12:15, 4 February 2017 (UTC)