Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dale Pendell

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 of the debate was KEEP. -Splash^talk 00:52, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dale Pendell

Was tagged for speedy deletion by James084 as nn-bio, but he's an author. I found his books on Amazon, so bringing it to AfD instead. No vote. howcheng {chat} 19:21, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

• Keep notable and verifiable -- MisterHand 19:27, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
• Cleanup If this person is a notable author, I would like to see citations for reviews of his work and influence on other writers in related fields. -- (aeropagitica)  22:48, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
• I went to the Mercury House website to find out if they were a vanity press, but they seem to be a legit independent press. I did find this on their website:

Dale Pendell, PHARMAKO/DYNAMIS: Stimulating Plants, Potions, and Herbcraft: Finalist, 2003 PEN CENTER USA Literary Award, Creative Nonfiction.

And from the PEN CENTER website:

PEN USA is a non-profit membership organization made up of writers of every stripe that work west of the Mississippi. Its members are connected by the goals of building interest in the written word and defending writers worldwide.

Based on that, I'll vote weak keep, but things like that should be added to the article. User:Zoe|^(talk) 23:27, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Yes it exists and no I don't feel it's notable. Weak Keep Thanks to JoaoRicardo for that link. Allen Ginsberg being for it is some sort of notability! Dlyons493 Talk 23:45, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per above. Clearly not a speedy and we might have better info if the article was not tagged after one minute. -- JJay 02:20, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Please stop attacking AfD nominations and nominators, or I will start deleting your comments. User:Zoe|^(talk) 03:35, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

• On reflection, may have been a speedy and the newbie editor had more than enough time to submit a decent article. Still think that the article should be kept and deserves clean-up. -- JJay 03:55, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. Not notable. Publishing a book is too easy today. JoaoRicardo^talk 17:54, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. On a second thought, his page at Mercury Press does seem to imply some notability. He won two literature awards which are sure real and seem relevant. JoaoRicardo^talk 18:06, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Although he seems a minor writer, there is a substantial interest in this author as evidenced in his presense elsewhere on the web. I vote to keep it.

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.