Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edouard d'Araille

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. SarahStierch (talk) 01:52, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edouard d'Araille

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

BLP that does not appear to meet basic notability standards. PROD removed without comment. Thargor Orlando (talk) 00:57, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 01:06, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 01:06, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. After perusing it thoroughly on November 29 I tagged the article as insufficiently notable. Since that time, Johnhargreaves added some more sources but none to address the problem of notability, that is, none which would help to satisfy the minimal requirements of WP:BASIC. More references were then added by Aldersonsmith, including listings of books at Worldcat and the British National Biography, but these only show that a book exists; they do not help establish notability. Aldersonsmith also asserted that the quote by John Bayley ("Technically fascinating and moving") was made by a man connected to the London Review of Books and the New York Book Review, however it appears that Bayley's comment was not actually published by those periodicals or by any others. Perhaps the compliment was delivered in person, over the phone or by email. So what we have here is an overwhelming number of references none of which give us traction toward WP:BASIC. I have searched the interwebs for traces of dedicated coverage about d'Araille but I have not found anything suitable. Unfortunately I must weigh in with 'delete'. Binksternet (talk) 01:40, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:24, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Binksternet is quite right that the present article does not on the surface provide all the immediate requisites of WP:BASIC. However, on looking more closely at the sources and references, which are more substantial and numerous than for many an article on Wikipedia, it is not on the other hand entirely true that none of them go any distance to establish notability whatsoever. Two recent and subject-independent biographies of Edouard d'Araille - one in French (2013) and the other in German (2014) [of which I received a review copy] - have helped me establish many key facts for the purpose of providing a concise, non-laudatory article. The quote from Professor John Bayley, long-standing key columnist for the London Review of Books and contributor to New York Book Review was indeed not from either of these publications but from a Foreword written expressly by him for Edouard d'Araille's first publicly released book of poetry In a Short Space of Time (1999). There was no need to quote this foreword in its entirety but a brief comment seemed appropriate to mention in the context. The truth is that I struggled to find references for my Paul Louis Landsberg article more than for this one because I could find no biography whatsoever in existence and no photo of this latter author at all. It is true that presence of Edouard d'Araille's volumes in the British Library, the Bodleian, Trinity College Dublin etc.. does not prove notability per se, nor does the presence of his books in the British National Biography, on Worldcat or from bookshops worldwide close the case either. However, as a long-term literary observer I have seen the increase of this author's coverage on the internet alone balloon from a handful of entries in 1999 (on Google) to over 10,000 (on the same engine) at the current time. Again, though not conclusive of notability, the vast majority of these entries establish the availability of this author's works throughout the world in hardback, paperback, audiobook and ebook formats as well as the vast range of articles, introductions, complete works of poetry and fiction that he appears to have published in a period of less than fifteen years. Another element that sways me toward believing in the notability of this author is the level of projects he has been involved in, including two documentaries in collaboration with Robbe-Grillet, his numerous music videos for The Aftermath and his long-term attempts to popularize works of philosophy and literature. Even though he has only given half a dozen interviews over the last fifteen years - most of which I have cited - and only two independent biographies about him, just because there is not a flurry of dedicated coverage on the 'interwebs' about him does not mean that the offline coverage of him is not significant enough to warrant consideration. The bibliography and references on Edouard d'Araille have been given to the best of my knowledge based on all materials currently available to me, online and offline, and although a single new source may more quickly tip the balance in favour of the notability of this contemporary author, the materials provided and many biographical details cited with supporting evidence do seem to establish the overall picture of an author of repute. I simply request that my fellow Wikipedians, though I am heretofore only a short-serving contributor, take time before hastening speedy deletion of this article.Aldersonsmith (talk) 23:55, 5 December 2013 (UTC) NB - Not having been familiar with the process I accidentally removed the 'PROD' tag after having made improvements. Apologies for this as it was just due to my inexperience as a Wikipedian. I have now understood what the tag is for and that tags are always to be left intact.Aldersonsmith (talk) 20:18, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The 'PROD' tag can be deleted by anyone who disputes deletion. You dispute deletion, so your removal of that tag, even by accident, is valid. The removal of that tag brings us here to this page to discuss whether the article should be kept. This discussion is very useful because it will serve in the future when people are wondering about the treatment of d'Araille on Wikipedia. Binksternet (talk) 21:16, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Sources should be about a person, independent of that person (not links to Amazon, Worldcat, speeches, books by the person, etc). For WP:ARTIST it means book and film reviews in reliable sources. Has there been even 1 book/film review in a reliable source? Though obviously need more than 1 to establish notability. -- GreenC 20:52, 8 December 2013 (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.