Talk:Alan Pipes

Untitled

There is evidence in this article that Pipes is a notable, published author (all titles published by known publishers, not vanity) and magazine editor; this article will expand over the coming week as I add more to this. Speedy deletion of articles under construction does not help the Wikipedia project. WorthyDan (talk) 11:56, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Not all writers are notable enough to have articles in Wikipedia. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:08, 16 September 2008 (UTC

Just because you haven't heard of Pipes, doesn't mean he isn't notable (of course, it can be argued that lack of "notability" is not a criterion for deletion in any case). I'd like a more objective argument here, please. Pipes books are still in print (one is about to enter its fifth edition) and are notable in terms of art and design education and publishing. Pipes background is something I'm also researching; he was an early writer on CAD and similar subjects. Excluding Pipes because you believe he is not notable would make Wikipedia less than the "sum of all human knowledge". Wikipedia's notability page says 'There is no harm in including an obscure topic, because if it is truly non-notable, people simply won't search for it or link to it.' WorthyDan (talk) 16:02, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

I said nothing about "I haven't heard of him" because that would be WP:IDONTKNOWIT, a totally invalid argument. Notability is not an option, it is a requirement; the quote you give above is from an opinion essay citing a frequently-made argument, not froma any part of Wikipedia's policy. Its reasoning includes such invalid components as WP:EVERYTHING ("Wikipedia should be about everything") and WP:NOHARM ("It doesn't hurt anything to have articles about non-notable subjects here"). These are among the many Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:58, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Improvements still needed

I've looked at the article and deprodded it. I added one reference and wikified the books. Here are my recommendations for further improvements:

• Look at WP:CREATIVE for how to demonstrate that Pipes is notable. The third clause "The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, which has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews." seems to be the best bet.
• Looks like Amazon.com has entries for some of his books in Spanish. Translations speak to notability, but I don't speak Spanish. Go ahead and use {{cite book}} to document translations of the books in his publications section.
• Find more book reviews. I added one, but more are needed.
• Check Google Books and Google News for reliable sources which document Pipes' work. Add what you find.

I'll be watching this talk page for questions, although I'm semi-busy writing another article and watching several others. If more efforts are as fruitful as my initial work here, then notability should be well within reach. Cheers, Jclemens (talk) 23:16, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks - that's far more constructive than just adding endless tags to the article and very much appreciated. WorthyDan (talk) 07:14, 17 September 2008 (UTC)