User talk:Steffanpiper/orig

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page was moved from Talk:Steffan Piper to User talk:Steffanpiper/orig

Non-notable bio -- only 87 google hits (comment mistakenly said 10 --- I wish I could edit *that*), also appears to be both autobiography and advert (first Google hit is author's site). Brian 15:49, 14 July 2006 (UTC)btball

Person is a published author by a notable press. please check amazon. Also, two publications coming out this year, see books, 2 books being brought back from out-of-print status in 2007 by Simon & Schuster. I am my own agent. Thanks in advance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Steffanpiper (talk • contribs)

[edit] Confirmation of Autobiography

So, it *is* an Autobiography?. Please read Wikipedia:Autobiography also Wikipedia:Importance Brian 16:02, 14 July 2006 (UTC)btball

Biographies often placed for media uses, or into public domain typically done by an agent (literary, entertainment, etc.) of that person, and as stated I am my own agent, I interact with my publisher on my own behalf, as other notable persons like Carey Grant (this first actor/agent to break from mainstream studio representation model), Jack Kerouac, Michael Jordan, et al. My function is not uncommon. How does Wikipedia differentiate bio material when it allows the placing of bio info from walk-on actors on television shows but discriminates against placing information on published authors? Strange policy, but probably one that is allowed to be interpreted by administrators on a case by case basis causing deviation. I openly respect your opinion, and as consistency is not a human trait (Ruth Gordon, 1971), I can accept deletion without cause for concern, but I ask you to consider the difference between biography and auto-biography on the basis of agenting. I will also bring your attention to a duplicate page that was created due to the way the browser noted ‘Steffan Piper’ as steffan piper & Steffan piper. Please see Steffan piper in your Wikipedia database and if possible to keep the prior and delete the latter, many thanks. If not, thanks for doing the work, regardless.

[edit] Thanks for the comments

Under the Wikipedia importance criteria is the following: "Published authors, editors and photographers who received multiple independent reviews of or awards for their work". From my Google search it doesn't seem you fit that requirement. What do you think? I do have sympathy for your self-representation argument and, in general, Wikipedia tries to be flexible. I was tempted to propose the article for deletion on the grounds of auto-biography (slower than the speedy delete) but based on all your comments, I won't do that - but that doesn't meen someone else won't. My main concern is one of notability - to me the article doesn't seem to pass that test and seems, rather, one to promote your books. But Wikipedia isn't a place for advertizing. If you still think that your article should remain (as passing the notability and verifiability tests) as an exception to "no autobiographies", you should place a hangon tag on the article page. Otherwise it *could* be deleted while we're still discussing this. BTW, thanks for your calm discussion of this - often new editors who have articles proposed for deletion react pretty negatively :-) Brian 16:34, 14 July 2006 (UTC)btball

Thanks for your comments, after reading your bio, it seemed like you knew what you were doing, in regards to working with Wikipedia. As a last post on this, I'd just like to state for the record, that my desire is not one of advertisement for my books, both in and out of print, as Amazon & Alibris is a better resource for that. I merely included, it as it seems, that it is a standard format incorporated into author bios. I would also like to suggest 'small', obviously not obscure, from your policy that you forwarded me to read on importance. sub head 2, I believe.

Finally, I control all information on my person as my agent, website, bio, etc. I have been featured over the years in 'Rosebud' and 'Mobius' magazine. My poetry has recieved national acclaim (yes, small obscure field) and has been used in lecturing / presentation by professors at NYU (TISCH) & University of Missouri.

Thanks again for the consideration, and best wishes.

[edit] Hangon - maybe this can be turned into a good article

Hi, I just place a hangon tag on the page.

I suggest either adding the citations to the Rosebud and Mobius articles and references to any awards, reviews and usage of your material as well as come copyediting so that the article reads a little more like an encyclopeida article than a(n) (auto)biography --- or send me the information (either via email or on my talk page) and I'll see what I can do to rework the article. As it stands, it's likely to be deleted. I'm not so worried about the autobiography aspect and I'm sure we can word the article so that it is not an advertising entry - but it does need to demonstrate notability - especially when a Google search turns up so few hits. Let me know how I can help. Brian 17:08, 14 July 2006 (UTC)btball