Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diana Pharaoh Francis

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, though the closure could also have been keep. I think it is fair to say that most (if not all) voters presume or know that her work is described somewhere, but we still need to find this somewhere, read it, decide whether it is sufficient, and add it to the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:59, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Diana Pharaoh Francis[edit]

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

Certainly not notable for WP:CREATIVE, WP:PROF and WP:GNG as she's only been an Associate and Visiting Professor and, as for the other perspectives, my searches have found nothing better than a few links at Books and Highbeam but they are only mentions, there's no actual coverage. Notifying DGG for subject analysis. SwisterTwister talk 06:15, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 06:17, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Snow Keep: this one is a noted Science Fiction author, who also teaches. Try Amazon and do your homework before you nominate these. Montanabw ^(talk) 09:25, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Amazon is a sales site. This Afd nomination is a reasonable one. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:57, 4 June 2016 (UTC).[reply]

Keep I know that Google searches sometimes aren't very accurate. So I would encourage you, SwisterTwister to use HighBeam more often and perhaps get some database access if you are going to AfD authors. For example, HighBeam turns up that she is written up in the book Contemporary Authors, so we have a bio on her in a RS. EBSCO brings up multiple reviews in Library Journal, Booklist and VOYA, (which is a publication for professionals who work with young adults). Using Google and other search keys, brings up a Publishers Weekly Review. She passes WP:CREATIVE #3. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 14:46, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Weak 'Keep According to WorldCat, her most widely held book in in about 250 libraries [1]. As usual with series authors, other books in the series are heldin similar numbers. This is not very high for SF that is apparently intended for adolescents. Her publisher is Roc books, a major SF imprint of Penguin, a major publisher. There should be at least the routine reviews. DGG ( talk ) 17:05, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Her work has been listed by Publisher's weekly. I think her niche is urban fantasy, not young adult. Most genre fiction tends to be short-lived on library shelves, particularly when not published in hardcover. I found quite a few reviews, though I'm not familiar with the quality of the sources that review work in that genre. Montanabw ^(talk) 21:37, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:16, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:16, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Undecided for the moment but learning delete. I looked in Gbooks, in Highbeam, in Worldcat and in JSTOR for published reviews of her word and am coming up with precisely bupkis. Using EBSCO seems to require being behind some sort of a paywall. So far the only published review of the subject's work that I see is the one mentioned above (but still not included in the article), a Publishers Weekly Review. I also tried some plain Google searching to try to find other reviews, but am only getting a ton of commercial mirrors, fan-sites and various blogs. So if there in fact do exist bona fide multiple published reviews of the subject's work in sources passing WP:RS, I'd like to see the actual evidence (and I'd really want to see more than just 2-3 of such reviews). Regarding library holdings argument raised by DGG: I would have been willing to consider this argument if we were talking about academic notability and scholarly books. But these books are just commercial fiction books. Here we should not use WP:PROF considerations, and just go with WP:CREATIVE standards. Nsk92 (talk) 22:52, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete for WP:Creative at present. We need multiple independent in-depth reviews to establish notability. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:57, 4 June 2016 (UTC).[reply]
Weak keep per DGG: the fact that some libraries stock her books and that her publisher is an imprint of a respected publisher like Penguin is significant. She has been a visiting professor in the Masters in Fine Arts in Creative Writing at the University of Western Colorado.[2] At least two of her books have been translated into German (Schwarzes Feuer, Dunkle Fesseln).[3] She contributed the article, "Forms of protest. The colonial feminine in Pat Murphy's 'His vegetable wife' " to "Science fiction, imperialism and the Third World : essays on postcolonial literature and film" edited by Ericka Hoagland and Reema Sarwal. (That was the only reference to her in the catalogue of Cambridge University Library.) I read that she gave up her academic career recently to concentrate on writing. Mathsci (talk) 07:34, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- - Which, no doubt, is far more lucrative. Have you noted sales figures? This is genre fiction, but she does fine (see Amazon), looks like she has about 14 books. Montanabw ^(talk) 05:19, 6 June 2016 (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.