Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonathan Blum (writer)

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. Sandstein 10:45, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jonathan Blum (writer)[edit]

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

Non notable author of a single non notable book. Worldcat has only 28library holdings which is trivial for fiction. The HuffPost reference is basically a press release, complete with a plug for the publisher. This is not the same person as the notable writer Jonathan Blum. DGG ( talk ) 03:36, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Lakun.patra (talk) 04:41, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Lakun.patra (talk) 04:41, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Lakun.patra (talk) 04:41, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Sources are trivial, and subject does not seem notable enough for an article. ~EdGl! 23:15, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Writer of literary fiction with enough coverage, awards for an article. Just needs sourcing.E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:38, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cleaned it up, sourced it. KCRW interview and Iowa Public Radio "best books" list put him over the top. He's an NPR kind of writer.E.M.Gregory (talk) 23:41, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A local best books list or interview is not notability, but rather indiscriminate coverage of local authors. How can it be truly important with so few library copies? Libraries buy on the basis of national level reviews, and it is those reviews show notability. Not these. DGG ( talk ) 04:40, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Added reviews.E.M.Gregory (talk) 11:14, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:42, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 03:07, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

comment minor literary author, but he does have prizes, reviews, write-ups in small literary magazines, even profiles/interviews in real newspapers in town where he has done readings. And the NPR stuff. I'm not saying he famous, just that he squeaks past notability for a literary writer. I presume there will be more books. The article is now well-sourced ~~and purged of hype,~~ although the subject - who we all suspect of editing it under a series of names - would be well advised to edit on a few other writer's pages, in order to learn Wikipedia style before continuing to edit. E.M.Gregory (talk) 01:39, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz ^Humbug! 19:07, 20 April 2015 (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.