Talk:Richard Denner

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Article milestones Date Process Result January 23, 2008 Articles for deletion Deleted February 29, 2008 Deletion review Overturned

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by the Arts and Entertainment work group.

This article has been automatically assessed as Stub-Class by WikiProject Biography because it uses a stub template. If you agree with the assessment, please remove {{WPBiography}}'s auto=yes parameter from this talk page. If you disagree with the assessment, please change it by editing the class parameter of the {{WPBiography}} template, removing {{WPBiography}}'s auto=yes parameter from this talk page, and removing the stub template from the article.

This page has been mentioned by the press by a media organization. The mention is in: Nicholson Baker. "The Charms of Wikipedia", The New York Review of Books, 2008-03-08. Retrieved on 2008-03-05.  Andrew Leonard. "Don't press the Wikipedia delete button", Salon.com, 2008-02-09. Retrieved on 2008-03-05.

[edit] establishing notability

It is my understanding that per WP:BIO, Richard Denner is considered notable if there are multiple reliable sources dissecting his importance. I believe that his profile at the Electronic Poetry Center SUNY Buffalo and this analysis of his work at Big Bridge constitute such. However, I edited both, thus submit the sites to others for consideration. JonathanPenton 03:44, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your open approach to this question. I find it difficult to be positive about his notability. While the two references you provide demonstrate that people read his poems, it seems a very specialized selection of poetry readers who recognize him. The waters have been muddied further by Richard apparently editing the article himself, which makes it difficult (see WP:COI). This is usually an indicator of a non-notable person trying to increase his notability. I can't get away from the fact that he gets fewer than 500 Google Hits, which again indicates a low level of notability. I'd appreciate comments from other editors, before we consider going to AfD. Gillyweed 05:38, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for looking into it, and your patience with seeking consensus. I sourced the article, and added some information on Denner's collaboration with David Bromige. I don't have an "interest" in that work, and my understanding is that that's permissible under WP:COI, but let me know if I've misunderstood. I welcomed Denner, so hopefully he'll understand policy better (I don't understand it very well myself, and please forgive if I formatted the sources poorly). JonathanPenton 19:46, 23 March 2007 (UTC)