Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Catherine yronwode

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. - Mailer Diablo 15:20, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Catherine yronwode

NN author. There is some name dropping that claims to make her notable, but on her own merit, I'd say she fails WP:BIO as an author. Leibniz 17:01, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

• Weak keep. According to Amazon.com, Catherine has authored (in some cases co-authored) 61 books. I'd say that even if none of these books are particularly successful, she is, by the sheer number of publications to her name. Srose (talk) 17:11, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment - whoops. It seems that only the first 20 were authored/co-authored by Catherine Yronwode. She published the remainder. However, the first result on the previously linked search is in the top 45,000 book sales on Amazon.com. Most of the others are in the millions, however, so I'm switching to a weak keep. Srose (talk) 17:18, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. She may not be notable as an author, but she definitely is as an editor. She was once significant in the comic book field; she was the editor of Eclipse Comics, which was possibly the top independent comic company in the U.S. at its height. She was very well-known in the industry. She also edited some of the earliest Will Eisner collections. —Chowbok 17:43, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep cat yronwode is an extremely well known, influential and respected woman in the comic book industry. -Markeer 22:04, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
• Comment There seems to be quite a bit of vanity, self-promotion and linkspamming related to this page. I have also nominated Lucky Mojo. Leibniz 23:40, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

• Reply Well, I've had nothing to do with this page so I don't know the intentions of the creator or editors, but regarding self-promotion/linkspamming, I'd say that while the section on other wiki-articles that link to her could certainly be removed, the bibliography of an author is normal and expected, as are external links for those wanting more information. That just tells me the article needs a cleanup, not deletion. And I would add...all of those sections provide evidence of notability, which was the criteria you nominated this article for. Can't have it both ways Leibniz. -Markeer 01:30, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree. I removed one of the more ridiculous sections, but the article still needs to be cleaned up more. I would argue that the article needs to focus on her contributions to the comic book field, for which she is notable, rather than on her small-press hippie voodoo books, for which she is not. But still, it shouldn't be deleted.

It should also be noted that yronwode herself is active on Wikipedia and has edited this article extensively. Somebody should probably tell her, diplomatically, that it's not the best idea to work on articles about yourself. —Chowbok 03:01, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. Absolutely notable in her field(s) and for specific things she helped publish. The magick stuff she self-publishes is her semi-retirement career, so this is historical. As for User:Catherineyronwode, see for yourself. --Dhartung | Talk 09:11, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

• Comment, I've done an extensive rewrite treating her primary career with the attention it deserves (or at least a good stab in that general direction. --Dhartung | Talk 10:14, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

• Comment For notability, I would still like to see some evidence per WP:BIO:

"Published authors, editors and photographers who received multiple independent reviews of or awards for their work"

Her notability, not Eisner's. Independent evidence, not linkspam or something she wrote herself. Leibniz 12:31, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Reply Well, a quick [Google search for "cat yronwode"] has, among ~30,000 other hits, links to interviews and articles by at least The Comics Journal, comicbookresources, and the Comics Buyers Guide on the first 2-3 pages. With newsarama, those three are the principal sources of comics industry news that I'm aware of. -Markeer 14:16, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Reply to Leibniz: keep in mind that her major published works, and influence on the industry, date from the early 1980s. I'll see what I can do, though. --Dhartung | Talk 09:23, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep, notable for editorship. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 15:07, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep: Notable in the world of comics. DCEdwards1966 17:56, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. The figure meets WP:BIO and is notable within the realm of comics. RFerreira 23:11, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

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.