- 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. slakr\ talk / 21:54, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Rod Labbe (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
He's not notable. Notability seems to rest on a single review of his work in a two year old Horror Magazine called Diabolique Magazine. The other citations are blogs and a publisher's review. At best the work should get the article not the writer, but even that would be based off a single shaky source. Dkriegls (talk to me!) 22:31, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Maine-related deletion discussions. lavender|(formerlyHMSSolent|lambast 01:18, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. lavender|(formerlyHMSSolent|lambast 01:18, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This is Rod Labbe. The review from Diabolique magazine for my novel, THE BLUE CLASSROOM, was just published last week. It is not a two-year old review, as this individual states. A quick perusal of Wikipedia shows that I've worked professionally with at least nine major Wikipedia entries: Marie Wallace, Jerry Lacy, Larry Scott, Jim Romagna, Rusty Jeffers; Ray Dragon; Stephen King's Pet Sematary (the film), Dark Shadows (television show and 2012 film) and actor and bodybuilder, Steve Reeves. Whoever has targeted my article for deletion hasn't done his or her homework Yendor1152 (talk) 03:45, 19 August 2014 (UTC).[reply]
Feel I clearly established notability in the piece (author, journalist, 3 time Rondo nominee) with legit sources. Also, user who nominated this piece for deletion did not follow Wikipedia protocol and even notify me this was nominated. Underhanded tactic, to say the least. Udar55 (talk) 13:56, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- It appears the subject of the biography themselves has contributed nearly half the edits to this biography.Dkriegls (talk to me!) 14:41, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
According to the conflict of interest page, "COI editing involves contributing to Wikipedia to promote your own interests, including your business or financial interests, or those of your external relationships, such as with family, friends or employers." What I added was information about my educational background, which has nothing whatsoever to do with business, financial or family/relationship issues. Yendor1152 (talk) 15:34, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Yendor, I'm sorry for not providing you a direcet link to the COI text about self editing. Please read: WP:COISELF "You should not create or edit articles about yourself, your family or friends". --Dkriegls (talk to me!) 17:07, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't contribute "nearly half the edits," as stated. You can clearly see what I added. I'll be glad to take out those additions, since they have little or nothing to do with my novel or writing. I have a real problem with the user saying the sources aren't reliable. Since when are two established magazines--Diabolique and Fangoria (now over 35 years in publication)--not considered reliable? I've read many entries on Wikipedia with less cred. Yendor1152 (talk) 15:25, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Yendor, I am sorry you feel "targeted" and I'll try to help clarify some of the "lingo" I used in this deletion nomination. The number of edits was simply a sum of how many times editors hit "Save page". It is not a count of indvidual words added. You can find that list here at Rod Labbe: Revision history. As for your citations: Diabolique first publication was just shy of 4 years ago (not 2 years ago as I erroneously wrote above). Whereas, Fangoria is only mentioned as a publisher of your work and not as a reference about you. Having published work in Fangoria is not a measure of WP:Notability (people). I hope this helps clarify things. If you feel there are citations out there which are not mentioned on your Wikipedia biography that are WP:Reliable sources and discuss you or your work specifically as the main topic of the article, then please bring them to the attention of this page so deletion editors may consider them and add them to your biography where appropriate. Dkriegls (talk to me!) 17:28, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Go ahead and delete the entry. I don't care. Yendor1152 (talk) 20:15, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 00:24, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I really have trouble with people debating--in a public forum for everyone to see and judge--whether I'm "notable" or not, according to Wikipedia standards. It's insulting. My work should speak for itself. If you feel it doesn't, then eliminate the entry. But all this "discussion" is downright embarrassing and unnecessary. Yendor1152 (talk) 19:03, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- I am sorry if this procedural process has caused you any stress. A few facts that may help: First, this review is not cataloged by search engines (as far as I know) and thus will not show up in search results. Second, this is very procedural, it happens to a lot of biographies about journalists, and is not a commentary on your body of work. Personally, I agree you have an interesting body of work, but my opinion means squat as far as Wikipedia notability goes. Journalists produce a lot of work about other people that is significant and gets cited by Wikipedia, but often do not have much written about themselves by others. This makes them tricky subjects to work with on Wikipedia. I promise, you have not been targeted or singled out. This is a procedural tool used to illicit more review from other experienced editors. I am working on two other such proposals that resulted in people closer to the subject finding good references about the subject. Again, if you know of any, I encourage you to bring them here. Otherwise, this discussion will likely close soon and your request for deletion will be granted. I hope this experience didn't sour you to Wikipedia. Unfortunately, we have a lot of beuracratic tools for making this place better, but they can be very frustrating to novice editors. If ever in the future you find yourself needing help around here. Please feel free to ask. Cheers Dkriegls (talk to me!) 21:11, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
More information was added about the Rondo Awards, as well as my connection to Fangoria and Scary Monsters magazines. Yendor1152 (talk) 02:12, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Davey2010 • (talk) 16:48, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Delete per nom. Especially since the subject appears to be the author. Op47 (talk) 22:07, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You've got a hellava nerve. I am not the author of this piece. If you BOTHERED to read this talk page, you'd know that, moron.Yendor1152 (talk) 17:53, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Please try to keep civil Yendor and avoid personal attacks.
- weak delete Author isn't notable yet but I'm weakening because of my lack of familiarity with the weight of the Rondo Awards. SPACKlick (talk) 11:31, 15 September 2014 (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.