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 keep. Missvain (talk) 17:40, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

William M. John (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Fails GNG, WP:AUTHOR - The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors. The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique. The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series) or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews. The person's work (or works) has: (a) become a significant monument, (b) been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) won significant critical attention, or (d) been represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 10:18, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 10:18, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Colorado-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 10:23, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: I expanded the article to include 3 more reliable sources. Notably, John was an early winner of the prestigious O. Henry Award, was an early member of the Colorado Authors' League, and established a scholarship foundation that continues to this day. I linked to the NYT once on John's article, but he's mentioned at least two other times. 1. 2. Likely, these should be included in the article as well, but I'm unsure of how to incorporate them given that their content is behind a paywall. Likewise, his novel Seven Women gets mentioned in multiple sources, such as this journal and this newspaper. I'm not entirely certain of the best way to incorporate these things, but they undoubtably help establish notability. When factoring in the four sources I mentioned here, the three sources I recently added, and the three sources I originally featured, that's a total of 10 credible sources mentioning Mr. John. ThrillShow (talk) 14:32, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Followup to my earlier comment: I've continued expanding the entry for John. The newspaper article I linked above (which is now crossed out) probably isn't super relevant. However, I've found numerous other reliable sources along the way. I've now included 5 published reviews of his work. Thanks to your input, I believe the article now meets Wikipedia's General notability guideline. ThrillShow (talk) 00:09, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:NAUTHOR#4. Seven Women is a notable book (at least four reviews out there, per ThrillShow's great work) and he won the O. Henry Award in 1930. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 18:57, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, above editors have said it all, o'henry (joint) winner tips John into wikinotableness. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:37, 16 December 2020 (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.