Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Horton (author)
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. PeaceNT 17:01, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Michael Horton (author)
Non-notable author. Being related to famous people (thought you haven't proven it) doesn't make you notable. Neither does having written two books, one of which is ranked 1,456,523 on Amazon.com and the other ranked 2,400,271. His publisher is a non-profit. Corvus cornix 23:39, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
- Weak delete I certainly agree about one's relationship to famous people not conferring notability. The "non-profit literary publisher" is a very peculiar idea... I tried to research exactly what this meant, under the suspicion that it was some sort of vanity publisher. "May Davenport is a non-profit literary publisher distributing books to improve the lives of young people." As near as I can tell, what that means is, when they have a grant from a government agency/foundation (etc.) they distribute books for free to schools, group homes, etc. The books are "aimed at an audience in grades 7 through 12; many have a teacher's lesson plan available". What does all this mean? I'm not sure. What I was trying to determine is whether the choice of publications was based on some factor other than saleability and/or literary merit; I'm still not sure. But the useful research by Corvus cornix on Amazon's ranking has convinced me that these books are extremely undistinguished and non-notable and I postulate that if they had real saleability/literary merit, they'd have been accepted for publication by a for-profit publisher. Anyone with any information about the publisher or the books is invited to change what's left of my mind. Accounting4Taste 23:55, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
- delete Books held in almost no libraries (2 for one book, 5 for the other). I'm not quite sure of the publisher status. apparently first a self publisher, who branched out to what is either a vanity publisher, publishing cooperative, or very small specialty educational publisher. In any event, this particular author on the list is not a notable one. Just conceivably she is, or the company,but that's not the question here. DGG (talk) 02:50, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
- Delete as per accounting for taste Carter | Talk to me 07:29, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
- Weak Delete I don't see anything notable about either the article or publisher.jonathon 06:24, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Per Accounting4Taste who has summed up the lack of notability here. Pedro : Chat 08:01, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
- Delete per Accounting4Taste. --Sc straker 13:04, 17 October 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.
