Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Stevens (writer)

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 delete. Sandstein 18:02, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Stevens (writer)

Mark Stevens (writer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The subject of the article has never been the subject, as far as I can tell, of independent coverage. The marketing firm which wrote the article lists him on their website as the founder, and he has written books and articles, but otherwise the information is sparse. Very little else is available about the subject. This article was prodded and deprodded (and then prodded again by me, not spotting the first). I suggest we delete per

• Delete Concur with nom. Author does not seem to be an important or widely cited figure (AUTHOR criteria 1). A search reveals plenty of other persons named "Mark Stevens", but to find this particular one you need to type in the article title and then most of the content is WP mirrors. This appears to be some kind of independent coverage but I'm not quite sure as to the reliability or the relevance in establishing notability. This means there is no significant coverage in reliable sources and subject fails GNG. Does not meet more specific
  Pulitzer in 2005 but this is obviously not the same one, therefore fails WP:AUTHOR no. 4 as well. 198.84.253.202 (talk) 04:03, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Comment I think your linked interview is a different Mark Stevens. There's a Mark Stevens mystery writer as well, but the one under consideration focuses on Business/Religious works. --TeaDrinker (talk) 14:20, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I might have been confused - there's just so many persons named "Mark Stevens"... 198.84.253.202 (talk) 02:34, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the

missfortune 12:55, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the

missfortune 12:55, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the

missfortune 13:05, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

• Keep. Worldcat [1] shows the very wide library holdings of his multiple books. Most of the books are by established publishers (Sion& Schuster, Penguin, New American Library, Collier, McGraw Hill. The article here is a plain listing and not promotional. It needs a proper search for reviews,of course. DGG ( talk ) 00:22, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notability isn't inherited (neither is popularity a sign of notability) - him being published by established publishers is not sign of notability. Article quality (or lack of major, CSD-worthy defects) isn't a consideration of AfD either - which isn't for article cleanup. 198.84.253.202 (talk) 00:39, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete the sources are mainly works by him, not about him.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:04, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - so he wrote some books. Nothing indicates
  WP:NAUTHOR criteria are met.--Rpclod (talk) 02:40, 10 February 2018 (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.