Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kristi Brooks

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. While we always welcome new editors, I am more persuaded by established editors who are more familar with Wikipedia's standards for reliable sourcing. Though it is interesting to hear that the Furry world has its own award ceremony. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:25, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kristi Brooks

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

[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)

Doesn't meet WP:BIO or WP:GNG. Boleyn (talk) 20:33, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Women, and Oklahoma. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:56, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per nom, and based on a search online and at the Wikipedia Library; the article has one book review [1]; her profile at ISFDB does not list reviews in entries for her works. Beccaynr (talk) 01:36, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep wiki page has been up since 2006 with steady and incremental additions to the bibliography, and I found another review listed for her book here and a mention of her in a contest with other notable Oklahoma authors (Ree Drummond, S.E. Hinton, & Lou Berney)in 2016--LovingtheBruce (talk) 03:32, 23 November 2023 (UTC) — LovingtheBruce (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Keep. The figure is notable and has some reliable sources. Micheal Kaluba (talk) 16:01, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - The part of the WP:AUTHOR notability guideline based on reviews (#3) indicates more is needed to support notability than two reviews for one work, so the NONzine review found for Vision2, and the review from The Oklahoman in the article for Vision2, plus the passing mention of her name in a Best of OKC 2016: People source about other people, is not enough according to the notability guideline to develop a balanced article that is not advertising. The lack of adequate support in reliable sources for notability under any guideline is one reason for deletion, and this article also appears to be contrary to WP:NOT policy because this article seems to be promotion. Beccaynr (talk) 16:35, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:23, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I can't find mentions of the author at all, I'm not sure the NonZine review is a RS. There doesn't seem to be enough critical notice of the author to meet notability here. Oaktree b (talk) 02:08, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I still say Keep I did a slightly deeper search and found another mention of her as a runner up for the 2019 Ursa Major Award for Best Short Fiction and listed as a contributor to the Oklahoma Historical Society's 2020 Exhibit for Covid as an author/artist — LovingtheBruce (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Comment - from the award link: "The Ursa Major Awards are Anthropomorphic (a.k.a. Furry) Fandom's equivalents of s-f fandom's Hugo Awards, mystery fandom's Anthony Awards, horror fandom's Bram Stoker Awards, and so forth. The Ursa Majors are administered and presented by the Anthropomorphic Literature and Arts Association (ALAA), an organization dedicated to promoting anthropomorphic literature and arts both within and outside of the fandom." This does not appear to be a notable award supporting notability. The other link above is an archive listing, not a secondary source supporting notability, and may be a different Kristi Brooks who is a painter. Beccaynr (talk) 23:51, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Sources seem reliable. Nonzine has other reviews for books, music etc so I would say it's a RS too. Also found this podcast she was a guest on for one of her books https://www.heroesmediagroup.com/podcast/finally-fiction-with-kristi-brooks/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by FlowerdancerRH (talk • contribs) 23:13, 1 December 2023 (UTC) — FlowerdancerRH (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 05:34, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: a passing mention by a couple of local newspapers falls short of establishing notability per WP:AUTHOR. The clearly canvassed votes here certainly don't help the case. Owen× ☎ 17:24, 3 December 2023 (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.