Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Claude Napier

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. The "keep" opinions don't address the lack of reliable sources about (not by) the subject. Sandstein 08:57, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Claude Napier (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Unsourced article. Yes, I can verify that he did indeed translate books. But there are no secondary sources to establish WP:GNG. article was deproded without explanation. Rusf10 (talk) 00:55, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Rusf10 (talk) 00:55, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Rusf10 (talk) 00:55, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Rusf10 (talk) 00:55, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete It fails to use adequate references to prove notability. Nexus000 (talk) 02:46, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Notable and productive translator. Large amount of secondary sources in Alan Napier's 2015 memoir Not Just Batman's Butler, published by McFarland Press, for example. If what the deletion supporters are saying is true, then translators like Steven T. Murray should be deleted since they imply that there is no notability for translators of best-selling Scandinavian literature. Why not wipe this whole category: Category:Swedish–English translators? Vogler (talk) 07:49, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your first argument is based on the fact that his son published a memoir. Is it any surprise to anyone that his son wrote about him in the memoir? WP:GNG requires that sources be "independent of the subject", his son's memoir clearly is not independent. Your second argument is WP:ALLORNOTHING. Maybe there are other articles that should be deleted (or maybe not), but it is irrelevant to this discussion. You have not put forth a valid argument to keep this article.--Rusf10 (talk) 20:10, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We misunderstand each other here. To be clear my first argument is based on the fact that he is a notable translator judging by the huge amount of times his works have been mentioned in media of his time. Secondly I mentioned the memoir because it will verify facts that I thought you were disputing, it was not about making an argument. Thirdly I am well aware of WP:ALLORNOTHING, so pardon the rhetorics. If my arguments so far are not enough, do you think that the fact that Burgtheater ("One of the world's most important theater") staged one of his plays makes him notable perhaps? Vogler (talk) 16:07, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps there is a misunderstanding. I've never disputed whether any of this was verifiable. In fact, in my nomination statement I said I could verify that he translated books. The topic passes WP:V, but not everything verifiable is notable. So while his son's book helps verify, it does not provide any notability. The play may make a weak case for notability, but more information is needed. Did he just provide translation for the play or was he also involved with directing or producing it? Was the play itself notable? (not just the theater) Was his son moved involved with the play than he was? The way you cited the sources in the article, it is near impossible determine the answers to these questions. His son is notable, but that notability is not automatically passed on to him.--Rusf10 (talk) 17:51, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Apart from the translation work, he was also the managing director and designer at the Birmingham Guild of Handicraft for which there is coverage in works such as Jewelry and Metalwork in the Arts and Crafts Tradition and By Hammer and Hand: The Arts and Crafts Movement in Birmingham. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:13, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: per nom, fails WP:BIO + WP:GNG, not enough sigcov found which cover himself sufficiently CommanderWaterford (talk) 17:47, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The Birmingham Guild of Handicraft was a significant member of the Arts and Craft movement and important in the history of the city. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 14:36, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Most of the "inline sources" are a wikilink to a newspaper plus a date - not even an article title. I cannot find any sources about him and his work, just mentions of a book he translated. That is WP:EXIST not WP:GNG. He may indeed be notable but I cannot develop a case that he is, based on what I have found so far. LizardJr8 (talk) 22:10, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • No idea what those articles actually are, but they certainly weren't cited properly, giving us no way to verify them. Assuming the articles do exist, my guess would be that they are just book reviews that mention Mr. Napier as the translator, not in depth coverage of himself.--Rusf10 (talk) 22:57, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• KeepComment in every way meets the notability standards mentioned in WP:NOTAB:

As a jeweller and manager of The Birmingham Guild of Handicraft:

1. ”The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors.”

As a politician:

1. ”Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage.” (Significant press coverage in British media archives, pay for subscription and see for yourself).

As a translator:

1. ”The person's work (or works) has: (c) won significant critical attention.” His translations apparantly received nationwide critical attention. (He was regarded as an important translator and therefore were chosen to translate significant literature instead of less significant translators).

—Vogler (talk) 22:28, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I had to strike your vote, since you've already voted. But there's no proof that his work as a jeweler was particularly notable. And serving on City Council certainly does not pass WP:NPOL. As can be expected there are local newspaper articles that mention him while he was serving, but the same could be said for any member of city council. So it really just comes down to whether he was notable as a translator. The works he translated received attention, but they were notable before he translated them. It is the work itself and its author who are notable. Just finding a book review that mentions that he translated the book is not significant coverage of him.--Rusf10 (talk) 23:22, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Sorry, but, I'm not convinced the subject passes WP:GNG. I understand the sourcing is mainly print, but, for all we know they are passing mentions. While I don't doubt the important contributions of the Birmingham Guild of Handicraft, I did not know that serving at the organization inherently made you notable. My research brought up little to nothing about the subject, including online pay-to-play newspaper sources. Missvain (talk) 18:36, 21 May 2021 (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.