Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Barratt (British author)

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. Mr.Z-man 23:24, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mark Barratt (British author)

Mark Barratt (British author) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

This British author has written a biography that got at least token press attention, and has another book out this month. He seems to be on the cusp of notability. Article was prodded, I'm taking it to AfD procedurally as I feel it merits further discussion. Neutral at present. Jfire (talk) 02:56, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 03:35, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
• Delete. One review doesn't make him notable. Ghits (except for one) refer to another Mark Barratt. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 03:38, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
• Weak Keep - Well, no news [1]. However, there is [2] at amazon which indicates multiple books. I think this might marginally meet WP:BIO Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 03:42, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

  Anyone can sell a lot of books on Amazon. Independant secondary sources establish notability, not Amazon. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 04:38, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

  Well, that's the primary default criteria, yes. If anything is covered in such sources, they are notable. However, per WP:BIO, people could fail that, yet still be notable e.g per distinctions, accolades, expert in field, contributed to a compendium of knowledge etc..etc.. Although, none of these appear to be the case with this author. The user below me makes an interesting point about Amazon. I wasn't aware of said program. This might relegate my marginal weak keep to delete. I'll have to revisit abit later after more scouring is done. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 14:33, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

• For clarification: This didn't use to be so. It is so now because of the "Amazon Advantage" program, which is essentially vanity publishing, and Amazon doesn't let us know which books are "Amazon Advantage" and which are not. The McKellen biography entry at Amazon doesn't name a publisher, which is a bad omen for Barratt notability. TheScotch (talk) 08:55, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

• Delete - I applied the PROD tag (having missed a previous PROD). I'm not convinced this author has received sufficient coverage to warrant an article. That said, if the new book takes off, that shouldn't prevent the article being recreated later. I agree with the above idea that it is on the 'cusp' of notability, but it isn't there yet Fritzpoll (talk) 17:06, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

• Delete I don't feel this author's body of work reaches a level of notability for inclusion here. --Stormbay (talk) 17:44, 29 March 2008 (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.