Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Qwo-Li Driskill

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. Notability not established. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 23:44, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Qwo-Li Driskill

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

WP:BLP, based almost entirely on primary sources with virtually no reliable source coverage in media shown, of a writer with no strong claim of notability per WP:AUTHOR. The strongest claim here, having been nominated for the Griffin Poetry Prize, is actually not supported by that award's article — possibly they were longlisted, but being longlisted for an award that doesn't release its preliminary longlists at all is an unverifiable claim that accordingly cannot confer notability. Which means that nothing here is substantive enough to make the subject notable for anything more than existing, and the sourcing is not strong or reliable enough to pass WP:GNG. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 01:49, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Driskill is a well-respected author with significant important major-press publications in poetry and Native American studies, both single-author poetry collections (2) and edited collections. Driskill's work has also been included in numerous anthologies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Profvalens (talk • contribs) 21:19, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

None of which grants a writer an exemption from having to be the subject of reliable source coverage which verifies those things to be as true as you claim they are. A person cannot get over WP:AUTHOR just because they're asserted as getting over WP:AUTHOR, if media coverage isn't present in the article for referencing to prove it. Bearcat (talk) 13:19, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 16:19, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete The person does not meet ACADEMIC (assistant professor; not many cites on G-scholar). The person also does not meet AUTHOR - I was unable to find any reviews (which with poetry is always difficult), not even the standards (booklist, kirkus). The library holdings are not strong (~100). There are no major awards. This may be too soon, as this person is at the beginning of hir career. However, a career in queer Native American poetry is not going to get the attention of mainstream media, most likely, so I would advise editors to look to academic accomplishments for a future article. LaMona (talk) 17:31, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as currently still questionable for needed notability improvements. SwisterTwister talk 06:24, 28 April 2016 (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.