Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raman Mundair
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 per nominator's second thoughts and suggestion of further article development. Newyorkbrad 23:47, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Raman Mundair
Notability Tim.bounceback - TaLk 21:51, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
- Comment I made some comments at Talk:Raman Mundair. It is the old question of how notable does an author (who's not Stephen King) have to be? Shenme 22:34, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, there really isn't much of an indicator as to how notable an author is. After a second thought, though, maybe I was being a bit too picky when nominating for deletion. Tim.bounceback - TaLk 19:01, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- Ah, well, then we get into the question "how long do you give an article to become something worth keeping?" I certainly don't know. I think I'll practice wikifying the article, and hope the original editor comes back to finish (started in just the last 3 days or so). (issues of duplication, getting the links 'better', comparing exposition style with other poets/authors, reducing article to essentials, etc.) Shenme 19:59, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- Let's give it some time to develop then. I'll do some work on it if I have time then, and we shall see how this turns out - I suppose the notability question really comes down to what links to the article, how many readers visit the article, and how many editors edit it. Tim.bounceback - TaLk 21:32, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- Ah, well, then we get into the question "how long do you give an article to become something worth keeping?" I certainly don't know. I think I'll practice wikifying the article, and hope the original editor comes back to finish (started in just the last 3 days or so). (issues of duplication, getting the links 'better', comparing exposition style with other poets/authors, reducing article to essentials, etc.) Shenme 19:59, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, there really isn't much of an indicator as to how notable an author is. After a second thought, though, maybe I was being a bit too picky when nominating for deletion. Tim.bounceback - TaLk 19:01, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletions. Bakaman 23:21, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete not notable--Sefringle 04:50, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
KEEP this article makes a useful contribution to the documentation of Black British writers and writing. This writer is well known on the British poetry and spoken word scene and has published several books (as the Peepal Tree site confirms). This wikipedia entry is a good and useful reference for those of us who are researching into contemporary literature, particularly as contemporary poets and poetry tends to be ignored outside specialist publications. So I strongly urge that this entry remains. 62.7.150.93 12:45, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
- KEEP-I don't understand the objections. This person appears notable and interesting to me. Definitely keep. 212.219.249.5 18:59, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
- KEEPI think this should be kept. Someone who has published two books of poetry and had plays produced by the National Theatre of Scotland and 7:84 Theatre Company is clearly notable. 212.219.249.5 19:24, 22 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.
