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. Consensus is that WP:AUTHOR is not met. Let me know on my talk page if you want a copy of the article emailed to you or to talk about AUTHOR. -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 23:00, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Erina Harris[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

WP:BLP of a writer, whose strongest notability claim is being shortlisted for (but not winning) a trade association's internal award referenced only to the awarding organization's own self-published press release. The difference between a literary award that's notable enough to get its winners over WP:AUTHOR and one that is not hinges specifically on whether the award gets independent media coverage or not, but this one doesn't. Very little else here is reliably sourced either: other than one news article in a community weekly pennysaver in her hometown, which would be okay if the rest of the sourcing were better but isn't enough to get her over WP:GNG all by itself as the only reliable source in play, virtually everything else here is resting on primary sources: her academic career is sourced to her "staff" profiles on the self-published websites of the universities where she was a graduate student, and the section listing her writings metareferences each piece of writing to itself. Even here, the notability test for a writer is not just that her writing metaverifies its own existence -- it is that other people have paid published attention to her writing, such as critical analysis and book reviews. None of this is "inherently" notable enough to guarantee her an article just for existing, but the referencing isn't cutting it. Bearcat (talk) 21:34, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:59, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:59, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:59, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:00, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:01, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete My quick searches confirm everything Nom says. A writer who has had a few things published, but fails WP:AUTHOR.E.M.Gregory (talk) 21:00, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Defence As this was the first article I've created, I recognise that I am yet far from an expert at these matters; I hear and acknowledge your experienced arguments, and I am certainly willing look for better references where appropriate. I wonder, though, if minds are already made up unequivocally that this poet fails pass the muster of WP:AUTHOR and that no improvement in references would be sufficient, or if better references would in fact sway opinions on the question? (If the former, that would be good to know so that I don't waste my time researching the futile). As a mild defence of my first article attempt, I'd like to reference another article, one of several I examined as models before I attempted my own, one about another Canadian poet named Sandy Pool. Here is someone who has published two poetry books rather than just one, one of which was shortlisted for (but did not win) an award. Granted, the award-giving organisation is better known and has a larger geographical scope than the one Harris was shortlisted for (I assume each organisation had independent and qualified judges), but we are talking about poetry here. I wonder how many Canadians even know that there is a GG for poetry, let alone who won it, for for that matter who almost won it. I feel a bit like WP:AUTHOR should be read in the context of an article's likely audience - both Pool and Harris would likely be totally overlooked by the average NFL fan, but might well be both regarded highly by the smaller audience that comprised Canadian poetry enthusiasts, in which case the bar for WP:AUTHOR might be considered somewhat variable. But maybe such discussions have already been had long before I arrived on the scene... At any rate, the entire Pool article contains only three references, one of which (the Trillium) points to the awarding organization's own website (a fault that was identified with the Harris article), and the other two references are dead links. In creating my article, I diligently tried to _exceed_ the quality of an existing, approved article, so I'm a bit disappointed to see it apparently rejected. Is a poet who wrote two books, one of which almost won a GG and has no practical article references, so much more qualified than a poet who wrote one book who almost won an Author's Association prize and has a number of references (even if they aren't all the strongest possible)? I'm asking these questions not to be a pain in the ass - obviously I hope it will sway you against my article's premature demise - but because it appears to me that there is a certain subjectivity to the question of WP:AUTHOR and notability, and the distinctions between these two writers don't seem at all clear to me in light of that. If I'm going to persist in further article authoring, it would be most helpful if you would assist me in comprehending those distinctions, if you feel the call so be so charitable, so that I can aspire to be a better author going forward. In gratitude! Amicoknop (talk) 23:00, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Thanks for all your hard work, but I am afraid that this is nowhere near notability yet WP:Too soon. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:33, 11 March 2019 (UTC).[reply]
Delete. Per norm. Doesn't meet notability guidelines for WP:AUTHOR. Lapablo (talk) 18:26, 13 March 2019 (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.