Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abigail Hing Wen

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|1=Abigail Hing Wen}} – (View AfDView log | edits since nomination)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Abigail Hing Wen}})

I believe that the sources present and the ones that I could find aren't enough to establish WP:GNG. They're either listicles, blogs, or interviews. Some of the better sources ([https://www.scmp.com/lifestyle/arts-culture/article/3045855/chinese-american-teens-explore-their-cultural-ties-taiwan SCMP], [https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2020-01-06/-loveboat-taipei-author-sees-rising-demand-for-diverse-stories-video Bloomberg], anything about the possible film production) are more so about the book rather than the author. A lot of the primary info comes from her personal/publisher sites. And I do not believe that the current scope of her work would justify WP:AUTHOR. (She is a NYTimes Best Seller for her first book, Loveboat Taipei, however that doesn't appear to be enough for notability) BriefEdits (talk) 21:37, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Women, California, and Ohio. BriefEdits (talk) 21:37, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

:{{comment}} Seems like at best a detailed fan article that might be WP:TOOSOON and at worst a promotional author bio per WP:PROMO. — BriefEdits (talk) 21:41, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

• Keep. Her debut novel Loveboat Taipei seems to be notable. We could move the page to that title and rework it a bit, but I don't think it's necessary. pburka (talk) 23:12, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
• Keep per WP:NAUTHOR - She has a second book (reviewed by [https://www.kirkusreviews.com/book-reviews/abigail-hing-wen/loveboat-reunion/ Kirkus]), and the bestseller list for her first book, as well as the film, support the significance and/or that it is well-known. Multiple reviews of her first book include [https://www.kirkusreviews.com/book-reviews/abigail-hing-wen/loveboat-taipei/ Kirkus], [https://asianreviewofbooks.com/content/loveboat-taipei-by-abigail-hing-wen/ Asian Review of Books]. Beccaynr (talk) 01:16, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
• :In the WP Library, I found reviews for LoveBoat, Taipei from Bulletin of the Center for Children's Books (Jan2020, Vol. 73 Issue 5, p234), School Library Journal (Jan2020, Vol. 66, Issue 1), Booklist (Dec2019, Vol. 116 Issue 7), AudioFile (Apr/May2020, Vol. 28 Issue 6, [https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A623927795/ITOF Gale]), [https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A609585283/AONE BookPage] (Jan 2020, via Gale), and an appearance in [https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A613203742/AONE Children's Bestsellers / JAN. 5-11, 2020] from Publishers Weekly (via Gale). Beccaynr (talk) 01:54, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
• Keep. I did some edits to improve the article a bit, more work is needed, probably editing down the trivia and for brevity, certainly more citations are needed. Despite the flows, notability is established by Beccaynr above. CT55555 (talk) 02:14, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
• Keep: sources suggest that either she or her book are notable enough for an article but not both; as there is a second book on the way, part of the same book deal, it is tidier to stick to having an article on the author, to which both titles can redirect. Seems to be enough coverage to satisfy WP:GNG, though the "personal life" section has been unsourced since article creation in 2020, which suggests possibilit of a COI creation - though it went through AfC so should be sound. PamD 08:11, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

::I've made redirects from both book titles. PamD 08:25, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

:::{{reply|talk:PamD}} If anything, I believe that it should be the other way around (author and sequel links to the first book) but it is a safer route to keep the author article and consolidate works on her page until it's time to create individual book pages. I still believe that the bar for an author article for one notable work should be higher than a body of work because it's difficult to say whether or not the author's notability is purely derived from that one work, therefore rendering the author article pointless. But for now, I can live with the compromise of redirecting to the author's page. — BriefEdits (talk) 04:54, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

• Keep meets WP:NAUTHOR due to multiple independant reviews of her work. -Kj cheetham (talk) 08:39, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
• {{comment}} I still believe that the breadth and depth of coverage of the author proper is not at the point to justify her own article as the amount of information present could just be integrated into a "Development" section or "Production" section in the book's article. — BriefEdits (talk) 04:54, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

I know and have worked with Abigail and can’t see why this page has been marked for deletion. There are manifold available references for the facts stated, eg https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/artificial-intelligence/podcast-episodes/artificial-intelligence-podcast-episode-0.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pdelevett (talk • contribs) 16:20, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

:Please note that the consensus here seems to be to keep the article. Also note that keeping or deleting is not about anyone's perceptions about accuracy, inclusion on wikipedia is about notability (we write articles about famous people, not everyone). For more details, click here ---> WP:GNG If you know her, then you may have a conflict of interest, or bias, and I'd recommend switching into observation mode here. As almost everyone here is saying we should keep the article, it's likely that we will. CT55555 (talk) 17:50, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.