Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alison Goodman

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. Eluchil404 (talk) 07:47, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Alison Goodman

Alison Goodman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Declined Speedy (or Contested Prod) — "Notability? History shows only contributing editor (all others are categorizing, etc.) and no references." Vengeance is mine, saith the Prime  ^{03:01, 14 Aug 2008 (UTC)}

• Keep Singing the Dogstar Blues has won an Aurealis Award, according to this little anthology profile. Goodman is also listed in Gale's Contemporary Authors. Zagalejo^^^ 03:14, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
• Keep per above, award, CA. There are 10 copies of Dogstar within driving distance of me here in sleepy, li'l old Largo-- wait she's from Australia. Her book appears in over 1000 libraries around the world. She must have something on the ball. (Awards listed on CA added to artcle). (Really, if you can't get to Gale via your library, have a good talk with your Library Director. Tell 'em a former library board member said it's essential.) Meets Wikipedia:Bio#Creative_professionals Dlohcierekim 05:30, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. —WWGB (talk) 10:56, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
• Delete Article explains that Alison has written a book, and won a couple of awards, but it fails to demonstrate notability in accordance with the criterion at WP:BIO. On the matter of having written a book, at Notability criteria it says:

(3) The person has published a significant and well-known academic work. An academic work may be significant or well known if, for example, it is widely used as a textbook; if it is itself the subject of multiple, independent works; or if it is widely cited by other authors in the academic literature.

I know Alison's book is not an academic work, but this is the best advice we have from WP. I see nothing to suggest Alison's book is significant or well-known, or that it is the subject of multiple independent works, or is widely cited by other authors. It would be nice if every person who ever wrote a book and had it published could have his or her own article in Wikipedia, but that is not what Wikipedia is about. Wikipedia has articles about truly notable people. Dolphin51 (talk) 13:04, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Other than meeting the guideline by being included in over 1,000 libraries around the world? Dlohcierekim 13:18, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Comment I have done the creator, User:Metamagician3000, the courtesy of notifying of this discussion. Dlohcierekim 13:15, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

• Keep. According to WP:CREATIVE, notability is established if the person's work ... has won significant critical attention. I note that her awards include the Aurealis Award for Best Young Adult Novel and Book of the Year. Surely this meets notability requirements. WWGB (talk) 13:31, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Comment Another award has been added to the list. Dlohcierekim 23:08, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

• Keep There seem to be sufficient awards to indicate notability. I've found a couple of sources, one from the courier mail [1], another a short book review at the Winconsin State Journal [2]. I suspect other sources exist. I've added a source for one of the awards (the fellowship), which mentions some of the other awards in the list, as well as another award from the American Library Association. I'm not sure what the name for that one should be. Also, the article in the courier mail mentions translation rights for France and Germany (for her new book) in six figures, which seems to be another point in her favour. Silverfish (talk) 23:46, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
• Keep, based on the above, would appear to meet the WP:CREATIVE notability guideline, due to winning lots of awards, as well as WP:N for generally for having secondary coverage in reliable sources. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 11:25, 17 August 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.