968:. Notability for poets is often problematic — one can be highly regarded in the poetry community, have multiple published books, etc., and still not meet Knowledge's standards for notability. But in this case, I think the double Pushcart and heavy coverage of her in the small presses (where the poetry coverage usually is to be found) makes the case clear. —
231:, not one whose own self-published website represents the only verification.) No prejudice against recreation in the future if somebody can do better than this -- but a writer is not automatically entitled to a Knowledge article just because she exists, and nothing here properly demonstrates that Seaton clears our notability standard for writers.
900:
that's an inappropriate standard in the other direction. The criterion for coverage in WP is notable, not famous. And WP PROF is irrelevant. She's a professor of poetry, not of the academic study of literature. Her notability has to be judged a a poet. This is an excellent case of where one should
624:
I won't cast a !vote, at least for now, but it does seem that she may be yet another example an accomplished individual who happens to fall short of our benchmarks for notability, at least at this time. (And the same may be the case for her often-writing partner, Duhamel, based on what I see there).
411:
Well, it's funny that you say that, because I was just looking at the noticeboard, and the summary I gave above reflects the discussion I read much more accurately than your comment of
Huffington Post as an aggregator. Once again, we are talking about notability here, not accuracy of
340:
Your statement about the
Huffington Post is not supported by consensus, man. Original Huffington Post content is perfectly good for generating Notability; what people have questioned is possible bias in some of its articles (particularly opinion pieces), which has nothing to do with
223:. (Even the award win is referenced to the award's own primary source website about itself -- but for an award to be considered notable enough to hand its winners an AUTHOR pass, that award has to be one for which
948:
Pushcart Prize is a very important award,and sufficient for notability . So us having 4 books of poetry published by university presses--this is very rare--most poets are published only by specialist publishers.
165:
1003:
521:
601:
695:
159:
427:
and in monographs - and her poems have appeared in many, many major literary periodicals and magazines. Can't you admit that you were wrong, just this one time? :)
118:
541:
581:
985:-- I assume that "professors of poetry" are quite rare, plus the awards, the coverage & multiple published works. On the balance of things, it's a keep.
561:
921:
I have gone through more responses on this discussion and I still think this is a severe case of one event. Yes, that is talking about her merit as a poet.
377:
whose reliability or unreliability is not measurable by any normal journalistic standards. It's acceptable to use HuffPo when the content in question is an
306:
wire service content from, say, Reuters or the
Associated Press — but not if it's the originator of the content. And the only evidence I'm seeing of
207:
unequivocally notable enough to make its winners notable just for the fact of winning it. The only references present here at all, further, are
885:
it's not much. Knowledge bios are for people with a solid record of achievement that has made them notable, not beginners, however promising.
125:
696:
http://www.lambdaliterary.org/reviews/11/05/caprice-collected-uncollected-and-new-collaborations-by-denise-duhamel-and-maureen-seaton/
91:
86:
95:
345:. The New York Times piece may be an event announcement, but the Miami Times and Miami Herald coverage is more substantive. For a
78:
17:
393:
of it — but not when the content is originating from a HuffPo blogger. And no, I'm not wrong about this; it's been discussed
180:
147:
685:
758:
739:
676:
630:
609:
589:
569:
549:
529:
1035:
310:
coverage in a Google search is a glancing namecheck of her existence in a "today's events" calendar — I'm seeing
215:, which are not sources that can assist notability -- there's no evidence being shown at all that she's been the
40:
141:
973:
208:
774:
Sorry, my bad; lambdaliterary.org doesn't support https. Fixed above. I was counting nightowl as peer review.
926:
506:
466:
1015:
994:
977:
960:
930:
916:
894:
872:
853:
816:
797:
783:
762:
743:
706:
680:
660:
634:
613:
593:
573:
553:
533:
510:
496:
470:
436:
406:
364:
335:
293:
262:
240:
137:
60:
868:
812:
779:
754:
735:
702:
672:
656:
626:
605:
585:
565:
545:
525:
492:
432:
360:
289:
258:
1031:
990:
36:
187:
890:
849:
793:
723:
interview may nudge it past GNG. Though I have to say I discounted that first odd Night Owl ref that
501:
Ok, that's your opinion about the not news argument. The fact is either way this is still one event.
969:
173:
82:
863:
Multiple reviews of her work in peer-reviewed journals should do it, though. See discussion above.
690:
922:
841:
648:
502:
462:
381:
of work originating from another source, such as wire service articles from the AP — because the
250:
249:
She has coverage from
Huffington Post and the New York Times. I don't she how she would not meet
1011:
864:
808:
775:
698:
652:
488:
428:
402:
356:
331:
285:
254:
236:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
1030:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
986:
837:
200:
153:
886:
878:
845:
789:
480:
458:
212:
882:
833:
750:
454:
74:
66:
719:
I can't open the last one for some reason but what you've posted along with the short
956:
912:
667:
196:
686:
https://nightowl.owu.edu/2016/review-of-caprice-by-denise-duhamel-and-maureen-seaton
665:
Good question. Would you be able to post links to the actual reviews? I do see that
1007:
644:
398:
327:
299:
232:
220:
54:
112:
484:
352:
342:
803:
In what world are Lambda
Literary review and 3am Magazine trivial sources
951:
907:
284:- and discussed in monographs. For a poet, she's a bloody rock star. :)
457:. As for the Huffington post, it should be noted that wikipedia is
1024:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
416:
273:
691:
https://www.3ammagazine.com/3am/multiple-selves-painfully-split
420:
277:
1004:
list of United States of
America-related deletion discussions
522:
list of
Academics and educators-related deletion discussions
424:
281:
836:
unlikely. Sources are generally of too dubious nature for
753:
on top of the coverage push me to strike the 'weak' part.
602:
list of
Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions
483:, but a full write-up in Huffington Post is evidence of
302:. It can be used as a convenience link if and when it's
199:
of a writer, whose only evident claim of notability per
108:
104:
100:
172:
385:
in that instance is to the AP, and HuffPo is just a
397:in the past at the reliable sources noticeboard.
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1038:). No further edits should be made to this page.
369:Original content on The Huffington Post is not
788:All sources given are trivial in the extreme.
186:
8:
1002:Note: This debate has been included in the
600:Note: This debate has been included in the
580:Note: This debate has been included in the
560:Note: This debate has been included in the
542:list of Authors-related deletion discussions
540:Note: This debate has been included in the
520:Note: This debate has been included in the
671:seems to be a notable and reliable source.
582:list of Poetry-related deletion discussions
1001:
599:
579:
562:list of Women-related deletion discussions
559:
539:
519:
203:is that she won a literary award which is
727:especially bloggish and user-generated.
7:
647:fall short of the third bullet in
24:
272:: she has also been reviewed in
877:Compared to the impact made by
487:, which is what is in question.
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
415:Her work has been reviewed in
227:pay attention to the award as
1:
417:http://www.lambdaliterary.org
314:evidence that she's been the
298:The Huffington Post is not a
274:http://www.lambdaliterary.org
211:and a Q&A interview on a
481:Knowledge is not a newspaper
421:http://www.3ammagazine.com/
278:http://www.3ammagazine.com/
1055:
643:How can three reviews in
425:https://nightowl.owu.edu/
282:https://nightowl.owu.edu/
1027:Please do not modify it.
1016:01:18, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
995:05:59, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
978:01:52, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
961:05:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
931:01:10, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
917:05:43, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
895:02:53, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
873:22:35, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
854:22:22, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
832:. Tiny cites on GS make
817:02:57, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
798:02:53, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
784:17:30, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
763:15:23, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
744:17:25, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
707:17:16, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
681:17:03, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
661:16:57, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
635:16:51, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
614:16:45, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
594:16:45, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
574:16:45, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
554:16:45, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
534:16:45, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
511:22:56, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
497:16:05, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
471:16:00, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
437:16:47, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
407:16:24, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
365:16:05, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
351:, this definitely meets
336:15:51, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
294:16:50, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
263:15:10, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
241:15:06, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
61:01:06, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
32:Please do not modify it.
219:of media coverage in
905:use Google Scholar.
805:for poetry reviews
1018:
765:
755:Shawn in Montreal
736:Shawn in Montreal
673:Shawn in Montreal
627:Shawn in Montreal
616:
606:Shawn in Montreal
596:
586:Shawn in Montreal
576:
566:Shawn in Montreal
556:
546:Shawn in Montreal
536:
526:Shawn in Montreal
1046:
1029:
840:. Early career.
748:
221:reliable sources
191:
190:
176:
128:
116:
98:
57:
34:
1054:
1053:
1049:
1048:
1047:
1045:
1044:
1043:
1042:
1036:deletion review
1025:
879:Emily Dickinson
751:Pushcart Prizes
721:Tampa Bay Times
651:? Just asking.
300:reliable source
209:primary sources
133:
124:
89:
73:
70:
55:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1052:
1050:
1041:
1040:
1020:
1019:
998:
997:
980:
970:David Eppstein
963:
942:
941:
940:
939:
938:
937:
936:
935:
934:
933:
883:Marianne Moore
858:
857:
826:
825:
824:
823:
822:
821:
820:
819:
769:
768:
767:
766:
749:The two added
716:
715:
714:
713:
712:
711:
710:
709:
693:
688:
638:
637:
618:
617:
597:
577:
557:
537:
517:
516:
515:
514:
513:
474:
473:
448:
447:
446:
445:
444:
443:
442:
441:
440:
439:
413:
308:New York Times
266:
265:
194:
193:
130:
75:Maureen Seaton
69:
67:Maureen Seaton
64:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1051:
1039:
1037:
1033:
1028:
1022:
1021:
1017:
1013:
1009:
1005:
1000:
999:
996:
992:
988:
984:
981:
979:
975:
971:
967:
964:
962:
958:
954:
953:
947:
944:
943:
932:
928:
924:
923:Longevitydude
920:
919:
918:
914:
910:
909:
904:
899:
898:
896:
892:
888:
884:
880:
876:
875:
874:
870:
866:
862:
861:
860:
859:
855:
851:
847:
843:
839:
835:
831:
828:
827:
818:
814:
810:
806:
802:
801:
799:
795:
791:
787:
786:
785:
781:
777:
773:
772:
771:
770:
764:
760:
756:
752:
747:
746:
745:
741:
737:
733:
730:
726:
722:
718:
717:
708:
704:
700:
697:
694:
692:
689:
687:
684:
683:
682:
678:
674:
670:
669:
668:3:AM Magazine
664:
663:
662:
658:
654:
650:
646:
642:
641:
640:
639:
636:
632:
628:
623:
620:
619:
615:
611:
607:
603:
598:
595:
591:
587:
583:
578:
575:
571:
567:
563:
558:
555:
551:
547:
543:
538:
535:
531:
527:
523:
518:
512:
508:
504:
503:Longevitydude
500:
499:
498:
494:
490:
486:
482:
478:
477:
476:
475:
472:
468:
464:
463:Longevitydude
460:
456:
453:
450:
449:
438:
434:
430:
426:
422:
418:
414:
410:
409:
408:
404:
400:
396:
392:
388:
384:
380:
376:
372:
368:
367:
366:
362:
358:
354:
350:
349:
344:
339:
338:
337:
333:
329:
325:
321:
317:
313:
309:
305:
301:
297:
296:
295:
291:
287:
283:
279:
275:
271:
268:
267:
264:
260:
256:
252:
248:
245:
244:
243:
242:
238:
234:
230:
226:
222:
218:
214:
210:
206:
202:
198:
189:
185:
182:
179:
175:
171:
167:
164:
161:
158:
155:
152:
149:
146:
143:
139:
136:
135:Find sources:
131:
127:
123:
120:
114:
110:
106:
102:
97:
93:
88:
84:
80:
76:
72:
71:
68:
65:
63:
62:
59:
58:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
1026:
1023:
982:
965:
950:
945:
906:
902:
865:Newimpartial
829:
809:Newimpartial
804:
776:Newimpartial
731:
728:
724:
720:
699:Newimpartial
666:
653:Newimpartial
621:
489:Newimpartial
451:
429:Newimpartial
394:
390:
386:
382:
378:
374:
370:
357:Newimpartial
347:
346:
323:
319:
315:
311:
307:
303:
286:Newimpartial
269:
255:Newimpartial
251:WP: CREATIVE
246:
228:
224:
216:
204:
195:
183:
177:
169:
162:
156:
150:
144:
134:
121:
53:
49:
47:
31:
28:
987:K.e.coffman
842:WP:Too soon
649:WP:CREATIVE
452:Weak Delete
395:extensively
387:convenience
379:aggregation
320:substantive
304:aggregating
160:free images
887:Xxanthippe
846:Xxanthippe
790:Xxanthippe
479:Of course
389:link to a
1032:talk page
1008:• Gene93k
838:WP:Author
734:per GNG.
455:One event
371:reportage
322:coverage
201:WP:AUTHOR
37:talk page
1034:or in a
459:not news
412:content.
383:citation
375:blogging
119:View log
39:or in a
834:WP:Prof
622:Comment
423:and in
399:Bearcat
328:Bearcat
318:of any
316:subject
280:and in
233:Bearcat
217:subject
166:WP refs
154:scholar
92:protect
87:history
56:MBisanz
830:Delete
373:, but
197:WP:BLP
138:Google
96:delete
957:talk
946:Keep.
913:talk
725:seems
645:WP:RS
419:, in
326:her.
324:about
276:, in
225:media
181:JSTOR
142:books
126:Stats
113:views
105:watch
101:links
16:<
1012:talk
991:talk
983:Keep
974:talk
966:Keep
927:talk
891:talk
869:talk
850:talk
813:talk
794:talk
780:talk
759:talk
740:talk
732:keep
729:Weak
703:talk
677:talk
657:talk
631:talk
610:talk
590:talk
570:talk
550:talk
530:talk
507:talk
493:talk
485:WP:N
467:talk
433:talk
403:talk
391:copy
361:talk
353:WP:N
348:poet
343:WP:N
332:talk
312:zero
290:talk
270:Edit
259:talk
247:Keep
237:talk
229:news
213:blog
174:FENS
148:news
109:logs
83:talk
79:edit
50:keep
952:DGG
908:DGG
903:not
881:or
205:not
188:TWL
117:– (
52:.
1014:)
1006:.
993:)
976:)
959:)
929:)
915:)
897:.
893:)
871:)
852:)
844:.
815:)
807:?
800:.
796:)
782:)
761:)
742:)
705:)
679:)
659:)
633:)
612:)
604:.
592:)
584:.
572:)
564:.
552:)
544:.
532:)
524:.
509:)
495:)
469:)
461:.
435:)
405:)
363:)
334:)
292:)
261:)
253:.
239:)
168:)
111:|
107:|
103:|
99:|
94:|
90:|
85:|
81:|
1010:(
989:(
972:(
955:(
925:(
911:(
889:(
867:(
856:.
848:(
811:(
792:(
778:(
757:(
738:(
701:(
675:(
655:(
629:(
608:(
588:(
568:(
548:(
528:(
505:(
491:(
465:(
431:(
401:(
359:(
355:.
330:(
288:(
257:(
235:(
192:)
184:·
178:·
170:·
163:·
157:·
151:·
145:·
140:(
132:(
129:)
122:·
115:)
77:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.