Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Louise Crisp
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
- 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
Louise Crisp
Keep Alex Bakharev 10:51, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
From speedy. Does not seems to be very notable Alex Bakharev 08:18, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- Longhair\talk 08:56, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Keep, not many Ghits ([1]), but the ones there seem relevant. I've no idea how legitimate "The Thylazine Foundation" is, but she seems to have a few published works of borderline notability. Lankiveil 13:55, 23 October 2006 (UTC).[reply]
- Keep A fair few published works. This page could use some clean up and more sources etc.Obina 17:08, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Delete (note thylazine seems to be a private charity/community org with a free webzine -in answer to Lankiveil). One book on Amazon ( with low sales rank ). I can find 4 books with her as the author/coauthor listed in the national Library of australia catalogue but no independant reviews of them. No news articles (although someone with University access may have more luck). Nothing that seems to meet WP:BIO although poets are unlikely to generate much of the web-activity I've been looking for. - Peripitus (Talk) 21:36, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Keep. Her works have been published in Meanjin and other quarterlies. Capitalistroadster 02:49, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep - as per Capitalistroadster and Lankiveil. JROBBO 03:40, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - note to everyone who whishes to gratuitously interfere in subjects they know nothing about, pls leave them to people who have some interest/knowledge. article lists several publications etc. the area (contemporary poetry) is marginal enough in itself (ie 'i've never heard of this', from computer geeks on the other side of the world isn't a good criteria for deletion) but you could claim that about entire generas of entries on this site. once again, is it just self-importance that motivates people to interfere in areas they are ingnorant of? User:Bsnowball
- Comment As I said on both of your talk pages: Be civil and most certainly do not make personal attacks. People can make mistakes. Philip Gronowski Contribs 23:24, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per Peripitus and WP:BIO Point 7: "Published authors, editors and photographers who received multiple independent reviews of or awards for their work" Philip Gronowski Contribs 23:24, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Neutral - I think there are many Australian poets who are more significant than Louise Crisp, and who do not have articles, and in a rational world their articles would have been written first. On the other hand these other articles may be written some day, and this article may have its place.--Grahamec 01:20, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per Obina. JamesMLane t c 08:19, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.