Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeremy Robinson

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. (non-admin closure) Cerejota (talk) 00:27, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jeremy Robinson

[edit]
Jeremy Robinson (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I find no reliable sources in the article and no indication on the internets that this author is of more than incidental and local importance. This is the most reliable source I could find. Drmies (talk) 15:57, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, I agree with the nomination. As far as I can see this article is very likely to be part of the subject's acknowledged use of viral marketing. The involvement of so many SPAs is usually a bad sign. Guy (Help!) 16:11, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete No evidence that any of his books is notable in their own right; no major reviews in reliable sources; not published by major publishers, etc. A person whose only claim to notability is being an author, and who hasn't written any notable books, doesn't seem to merit a Wikipedia article per WP:N. --Jayron32 19:50, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Changing vote to Keep per new sources provided. Good finds, especially the one by Celerityfm. --Jayron32 20:52, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I disagree with the nomination. The author is published by a major publisher, Thomas Dunne Books, an imprint of St. Martin's Press. His books have been reviewed in national magazines including Booklist (not online), Midwest Book Review and Publisher's Weekly. Examples:Threshold, Instinct, and Pulse. These links, and links to other articles, had been added to the Wiki article after the issue of notability was raised, but were then removed by another user.Veago87 (talk) 21:04, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 13:40, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Author has received significant press coverage (eg [[1]] (how I heard of him in the first place) and is a well known contributor to the overall scifi/thriller genre. Authors come to this article to study how he became successful and use his page as a reference when referring to his works. It's not just because he's an author with books published under a major publisher that makes him noteworthy, it's also because of his unique marketing campaigns that he's created that has earned him press as well. Celerityfm (talk) 19:06, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Interesting, If I am correct you think that a local paper with 450.000+ readers (in a state with almost three times as much inhabitants and ranked 42nd among the US states for population) is significant coverage? He has a lot oif hits on the internet, but a quick looks seems to point to booksellers and self-promotion (own website, Facebook and so on). I like to see third party sources, what means: other people who write over Robinson himself. Find me a few (let us say: 10) and I will rethink my opinion about Robinson not being notable. Night of the Big Wind talk 21:20, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Woah, did you see what was posted up earlier? Lots of 3rd party sources there. My work per your request was done for me. Also he was on the cover of June's Suspense Magazine [2], check it out! Hope you will reconsider your delete vote. Celerityfm (talk) 21:30, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep--Wikipedia is my primary source for information on nearly everything. Quibbles about the tone of the entry may or may not be warranted, but I can't see how removing the entry would benefit anyone. When I want to know more about an author, one of the first places I turn is Wikipedia. The assertion that Robinson "hasn't written any notable books" is purely subjective. Robinson is a mainstream author, published by a mainstream publishing house; that in itself makes him a relevant subject for inclusion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.222.166.5 (talk • contribs) 18:26, 16 August 2011
  • Keep. First two delete !votes are based on a lack of sources which has now been addressed, and the newer ones are bare assertions and/or based on misunderstanding notability (regional sources are third-party, significant coverage is based on the length and depth of the article rather than the nature of the publisher and two sources are enough for notability, not ten). The new sources include in-depth coverage in independent reliable published works, and together are more than enough to pass the WP:BIO guideline, specifically WP:BASIC. Alzarian16 (talk) 17:48, 21 August 2011 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Jeremy_Robinson&oldid=1078429613"