Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nick Aplin

: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. joe deckertalk to me 05:27, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

=[[Nick Aplin]]=

:{{la|Nick Aplin}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources|Nick Aplin}})

Non-notable academic and author, vanity self-bio. Miracle Pen (talk) 16:57, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

:Neutral After seeing addition cites, will withdraw delete rationale. The cites herein aren't strong enough to warrant a 'keep' !vote, but enough to stay neutral. Dennis Brown (talk) 14:26, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

  • Keep. Winning an award from the Guardian for the year's best book in a subject area is a much more notable achievement than winning one of those specialty porn awards that, by unfortunate consensus, virtually guarantee notability. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 03:16, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
  • Weak keep. While I share the nominator's concern concerning WP:AUTOBIO, I agree with Hullaballoo that the award here is sufficient grounds for notability. WP:AUTHOR considers it sufficient if "The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, that has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.", and a Guardian award, coupled with other independent reviews [http://www.chessvibes.com/reviews/review-genius-in-the-background/][http://www.jeremysilman.com/book_reviews_jd/Genius_in_the_Background.html] seems to pass that mark. Sjakkalle (Check!) 10:49, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:14, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:14, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Logan Talk Contributions 00:13, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

  • Keep: If HW agrees subject is notable, the venn diagram portion of those who would find otherwise is quite small, so there won't be a consensus to delete it.--Milowent • talkblp-r 03:13, 27 April 2011 (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.