Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeremy Hooker

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 Keep. —Quarl (talk) 2007-03-11 01:12Z

[edit] Jeremy Hooker

Jeremy Hooker (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Article created by user:Enitharmon Press about one of the authors that they publish. No third-party evidence of notability. (Most of the article is a copyvio from here but please do not use that as ground for deletion - we can assume permission to copy has been granted.) -- RHaworth 15:53, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Keep Appears to be a notable poet, certainly sufficiently notable to warrant an article. See BBC Radio 4 interview. He has 37 publications available at amazon.co.uk. See also here. There are more sources I could link. The article needs these sources including to comply with WP:ATT. If I have chance I will do so, but no promises, sorry! Jules1975 16:10, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep if those promised sources are included into the article AlfPhotoman 16:24, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment I have updated the article to refer to the sources I mentioned. The article could be vastly improved and doesn't appear to do this man proper justice. However, I don't have time to do that right now! I have just added in what I hope is enough to establish that this artcle is about a notable subject and should be kept. Jules1975 17:34, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment I speedily deleted this as part of a batch of articles constituting adverts for Enitharmon Press. For some reason I didn't notice the AfD (all the others were either tagged for speedy deletion or prodded, which might explain it). I'll undelete it now. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 22:28, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Further comment To be fair, the page has been written by Enitharmon Press. It also refers only to the subject's more recent works (i.e. the ones they publish!), not his entire works. Therefore it needs rewriting and expanding to be less like an advert, but certainly worth keeping in my view. I will put some suitable tags on. I may even get round to a rewrite "one day".Jules1975 10:50, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep He is the subject of a volume is Gale's "Contemporary author" series, which i am about to add as a reference. this is a very solid 3rd part recognition of notability. I would be prepared to argue that any author with a vol. in that series --a standard resource in all libraries--is N. ( I added his University page--he is a lecturer, not a prof., though they use that courtesy title. I doubt he would be notable on that alone).DGG 01:40, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletions. -- Pete.Hurd 02:29, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. The article's subject satisfies WP:BIO. If the article doesn't do him justice, it ought to be improved. I have added another snippet of information and another reference to the article (a finalist for 2006 Wales Book of the Year; winner not yet announced). -- Black Falcon 07:38, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
    • I have further revised the article, adding a reference, removing in-text mentions of the publisher (could be seen as promotional), deleting another promotional sentence ("best of a consistently exploratory poet"), and a few other minor changes. See diff. -- Black Falcon 07:56, 10 March 2007 (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.