Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Denise Low

: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. Non-admin closure. Both notable state poet laureates with RS coverage despite WP:COI. Morbidthoughts (talk) 21:42, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

=[[Denise Low]]=

:{{la|Denise Low}} ([{{fullurl:Denise Low|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Denise Low}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

:({{find sources|Denise Low}})

Non-notable person. COI is apparent, as the user [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Limestone9&diff=prev&oldid=149453513 admits on their talk page] that the subject told them to write the article for them. CyberGhostface (talk) 17:12, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

:I am also nominating the following article for the same reasons.

:{{la|Jonathan Holden}}--CyberGhostface (talk) 17:14, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

:*Question: Low has received an award from the National Endowment for the Humanities, there are even more awards listed for Holden. Before I cast a vote, could the nom perhaps explain why these awards (and being a Kansas Poet Laureate in particular) do not lead to notability? As an aside, COI is not a reason for deletion. If the COI has led to a POV, it's a reason for cleanup, but AfD is not for that. --Crusio (talk) 21:15, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

  • Keep In addition to being the Kansas poet laureate and the awards, [http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=%22Denise+Low%22+&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&btnG=Search+Archives 152 gnews hits], [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Denise+Low%22+&hl=en&lr=&btnG=Search 51 gscholar hits] and [http://books.google.com/books?q=%22Denise+Low%22+&btnG=Search+Books&output=html 167 gbooks hits] give ample material from RS indicating her notability as an author and under wp:bio. e.g. [http://books.google.com/books?id=7mkVtYfvSgQC&pg=PA105&dq=%22Denise+Low%22&output=html&sig=ACfU3U3PU0dr3PKQQjLJ25FwjzikvMQQug this], [http://books.google.com/books?id=sbjbBSNoKdgC&pg=RA1-PA322&dq=%22Denise+Low%22&output=html&sig=ACfU3U2EDBYMmOYxjC_9lRWZw5voj2TGzA this], [http://docs.newsbank.com/g/GooglePM/KC/lib00144,0EAF41960DC623AC.html this], and Denise Low: Words of a Prairie Alchemist: The Art of Prairie Literature and Interview with Denise Low by W Sheldon in Midwest Quarterly, 2007. The COI puffery is minor, easily fixed and not a reason for deletion. John Z (talk) 22:11, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

:As for Jonathan Holden, whose AfD nom directs here, Keep is even clearer. I just added this book - {{cite book |author=Buchanan, Carl Jay |title=The poetry of contemporary American poet Jonathan Holden |publisher=Edwin Mellen Press |location=Lewiston, NY |year=2003 |pages= |isbn=0-7734-6630-4 |oclc= |doi= |accessdate=}} about his work to his article - strong proof of notability, in addition to many others, he clearly passes wp:prof, wp:bio, wp:creative too.John Z (talk) 22:24, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep Even if not all State poet laureates are necessarily notable, with this much published work, Low certainly is. As for Holden, the work of criticism about him from a major academic press is additionally enough to show it beyond much question. I am glad someone had enough interest to write these articles, and hope people do the other state poet laureates also. The nom should learn we do not delete articles because of COI. DGG (talk) 00:37, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

:My apologies. In the future, I'll be aware that autobiographies written by the subject or people affiliated with them should be welcomed on Wikipedia instead of discouraged.--CyberGhostface (talk) 00:39, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

::the point is that we be aware of the COI , and edit carefully--and, if necessary, skeptically, especially for autobio. "Associated with" is a very broad term--I'd say most good bio articles on Wikipedia are written by some associated in some way with the person. And it is generally a good idea to write with the cooperation of the subject. I've asked subjects many times for details and suitable references--they often know. DGG (talk) 00:44, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

-----------------------

::From GLG >>> It is probably because of my recent additions to both Jonathan Holden and Denise Low’s pages that someone suggested the material be deleted (as well as my lack of knowledge of how to correctly make an entry to Wikipedia). Please note that I have just gone back in to both posts and "removed" mention of my name in association with KansasPoets.com a website (a platform used by both poets as well as many others) dedicated to note worthy Kansas Poets. I’m assuming this might have been reason for the conflict of interest flag. Please know there is no conflict of interest. As far as is these two poets' worthiness of being included in Wikipedia… most especially, Holden is currently recognized as one of the most distinguished and notable poets in the United States. Likewise, Low is very well known throughout the United States for her continued contributions to poetry and academics. In regard to my previous note of over a year ago, perhaps I worded my response incorrectly.... before taking it upon myself to create a Wikipedia post for either, I thought it prudent that I get permission from both Holden and Low before moving forward… something to which both approved. --- 6 October 2008 (sorry I don't have more time at the moment to figure out how more properly to add a comment in this space.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Limestone9 (talk • contribs) 03:04, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete: Heavy conflict of interest. Alexius08 (talk) 04:45, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
  • keep conflict of interest is not by itself a reason to delete. The individual passes WP:BIO. This just means we need to keep a careful watch on it. JoshuaZ (talk) 20:51, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep, both. Certainly WP:COI is a concern, but it is not, in and of itself, a sufficient reason for deletion. Rather, it is a reason to inspect the case much more closely and skeptically. Here the WP:BIO cases for notability certainly hold up on closer inspection both for Low and Holden, based on the awards listed (for Holden also based on the distinguished professor position, under WP:PROF). Nsk92 (talk) 11:22, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep With respects to the nom, notability has become apparent and a welcome inclusion to Wikipedia. WP:COI is being addressed by the attentions of other editors. Wiki is improved. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 20:55, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep Notability sufficient, {{tl|COI}} and compliance to such is the requirement. -- billinghurst (talk) 05:04, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment Have done some cleanup, sourcing, and wikifying to the Jonathan Holden half of this AfD and will begin same for the Denise Low half. INRE WP:COI: I am not either of these two individuals, nor am I associated with them... and I do not believe I have ever been in Kansas. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 16:48, 9 October 2008 (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.