Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matthias Mala

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 delete. Seraphimblade Talk to me 21:48, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Matthias Mala[edit]

Matthias Mala (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No independent coverage and none found. User:力 (powera, π, ν) 18:10, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep According to the German National Library, which is clearly independent coverage, Mala is the author of 109 books and co-author of 11 others. A simple English Amazon search generated over 40 of them and a Google search on his name recorded over 10,000 hits with dozens of well known national and international booksellers listing his books, so I struggling to understand why he might not be notable. How many books do you have to write to have an article on Wikipedia? Would it help if the article listed a selection of his works? Bermicourt (talk) 19:05, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as I can't find any coverage of him or his work outside of Amazon listings and a Goodreads profile. He doesn't appear to meet WP:AUTHOR either. It's possible that foreign-language sources exist, but my perusal of his website didn't turn up any reviews or other coverage linked. ThadeusOfNazerethTalk to Me! 22:41, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment. Well Mala is German, so you'd expect sources to be in a foreign language. To give just a few examples across a wide spectrum of literature, he's cited in Bormann's Orte des Schreckens (2004), pp. 206 and 276; in Kraft's Keine Lust auf Untergang (2010), pp. x, 6, 155 and 163; in the Spanish journal Delibros (2004), p. 62; in Bekmeier-Feuerhahn et al. (editors) Kulturmanagement und Kulturpolitik (2011), p. 389; the German Jewish Institute's Handbuch Medienerziehung im Kindergarten (1995), p. 189; the German national newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine publication Ein Bücher-Tagebuch (1994), p. 588; and PEN Zentrum Deutschland's PEN Das Autorenlexikon 2015/16. Just how many independent, national and international sources do we need? Bermicourt (talk) 17:53, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      I never said I didn't expect foreign-language sources to exist - I should've been clearer that I just can't browse them as I don't speak German :). What's the nature of the citations there? Are they reviews of his work, profiles of him, academic analyses? If they're about him specifically, they should be cited in the article. As it stands, we can't verify anything in the article because the only reference is the members list of a professional organization that doesn't include any biographical information at all. A better option may be to draftify until those sources are worked into the article itself. ThadeusOfNazerethTalk to Me! 19:12, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 🌀Locomotive207-talk🌀 23:44, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Arbitrarily0 (talk) 14:46, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete this mostly unsourced article. Possibly draftify if someone wants to take that on, but get it out of the common space until it has reliable sources to establish notability. Doczilla @SUPERHEROLOGIST 19:39, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please review significant changes to this article. I have now cited the bulk of the article, added a selection of Mala's works and removed text that is as yet unsourced. Bermicourt (talk) 11:12, 8 December 2021 (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.