Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Jacobs (author)

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 draftify‎. ✗plicit 00:23, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Jacobs (author)[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)

Working writer, but I couldn't find sources to confirm he meets WP:GNG / WP:AUTHOR. Boleyn (talk) 21:43, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Michigan, New York, and Virginia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:30, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draft: Likely passes AUTHOR notability. I was able to find [1] and this [2] as reviews. The article now is basically a list of published works with no other sourcing. This is a long way from a finished article, needs a rewrite. Oaktree b (talk) 23:50, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A couple of reviews are not enough to establish WP:AUTHOR notability, which requires a person to be regarded as an important figure or "widely cited" by peers; known for originating a significant new concept or technique; created a significant or well known body of work that has itself (not as individual works) been the primary subject of multiple independent articles or reviews or of an independent book; OR won significant critical attention. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:05, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The article has primarily been edited by User:MarkTJacobs so a first step, IMO, is to notify this editor regarding COI. Lamona (talk) 02:25, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify There is maybe just enough out there on Jacobs to satisfy WP:AUTHOR? In addition to the brief reviews cited by Oaktree b above, I found this and this. Still pretty thin, and I can find no independent secondary source for the quote calling him a new Graham Greene. So... improve it and search for sources, but draftify until then given the lack of citations in a BLP and the COI issues flagged above. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:45, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comments - strike 1 is it's an autobiography, or c.v.. Strike 2, ironically, it's written poorly. If not draftified, I'd delete this for the poor writing. On the plus side, he appears to be notable. Bearian (talk) 14:29, 5 April 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.