Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Damian Conway

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 no consensus‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:09, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Damian Conway[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I could not find significant coverage of him to meet WP:BIO. Also does not meet WP:PROF, google scholar comes up with a namesake who is an expert in sexual health. LibStar (talk) 05:27, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Computing, and Australia. LibStar (talk) 05:27, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - There are two claims to notability I looked at carefully. That he is an author, and that he is the three time winner of the Larry Wall Award for Practical Utility. I also considered NPROF but that one is a clear fail. So looking at these others, I looked up the Larry Wall Award, and was rather surprised that most hits were talking about Conway, the three times winner. I could only find one other winner [1] and this posting explains why [2]. In any case the award is just a Perl conference award [3] and I don't think this is significant enough to confer notability. So the other guideline I looked at was WP:NAUTHOR where there are two books that he has authored (and one he has contributed to). One of these has a page. Perl Best Practices is a stub article. The book has a number of reviews I could find, although the quality of reviews would need assessment. So is it a notable book?

My reason for not yet making this a !vote is that I would consider a WP:ATD such as a redirect, but it is not clear whether the book is notable, in which case the best outcome of this AfD would be to merge content here with the book stub (in a section on the author). If the book is of marginal notability, might it actually be better to redirect that stub here? Or if the book has no notability at all, maybe that should be deleted too. Thoughts? Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 08:10, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the Perl Best Practices book was a major publication and inspired several modules based on it. Perl is no longer widely used for programming, which is why references are a bit dated. But Damian's work in Raku is very significant. Hard to qualify with references, but I would suggest he is one of the most significant Australian contributers to open source programming. Teraplane (talk) 01:25, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:30, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 06:29, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep No further comments on what I stated above but Teraplane calls the Best Practices book a major publication. Whether major publication == notable work is not the issue here, as the page is about the author. However a refusal to mention the book anywhere would seem to be a poor decision, but the author's page is the fuller, and under WP:PAGEDECIDE I would suggest that the book is merged into the author's page, to the benefit of them both. This would need to be kept in that instance. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 08:23, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.