Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gabriela Etcheverry

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

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 no consensus. After relisting three times, no consensus has been established. The arguments for keep (specifically Lelijg's comment) noted that the subject is notable and many reliable sources exist. (non-admin closure) — Music1201 ^talk 21:30, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gabriela Etcheverry

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

WP:BLP of a writer, with no particularly strong claim to passing WP:AUTHOR for any particular accomplishment and no reliable source coverage present to support it -- the sourcing is entirely to primary sources like the self-published websites of her own business endeavours. As always, a writer is not automatically entitled to a Wikipedia article just because she exists -- it takes reliable source coverage in media, supporting a claim of notability that would pass a Wikipedia inclusion criterion, to get one. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 16:01, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:02, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:02, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:02, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete lacks reliable sources to pass GNG.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:35, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep~~Comment~~ per Ipigott: We appear to have a Spanish-language writer (and article editor, too, perhaps). I'd ping someone like SusunW or another editor who works on articles about people from Spanish-speaking nations. Let's see what can be found. Montanabw ^(talk) 08:15, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:41, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I found some information in English, she is the winner of the nuestra palabra competition in 2008 [1] (though I'm not sure how big that is). She is interviewed in Cloudburst: An Anthology of Hispanic Canadian Short Stories [2] (via Project MUSE). I find her in Spanish sources, too. I'd ping Ipigott since I think he's fluent in Spanish, too. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:03, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. On the basis of the sources I have found, she appears to be an author who has received attention and interest for her work published in Canada.Ipigott (talk) 09:31, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please post the sources here? --Lemongirl942 (talk) 14:46, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete instead as the coverage still seems thin and there's nothing else convincing, I'll note WorldCat also only lists 31 library holdings. SwisterTwister talk 20:34, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- WorldCat holdings alone are not a particular indicia of notability, but searching there, I find she has also been published as Gabriela Miralles-Etcheverry, and most of her works, as noted in both this article and there, are short stories and literary criticism, things generally published in anthologies, not stand-alone works. She has at least three published books, and it looks like most of her works are held in Canadian libraries, so if you get 31 hits for Canada, that's not bad, particularly as she appears to write in Spanish. Montanabw ^(talk) 04:07, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There is still no consensus that I can reasonably act upon in this debate. I'll give it another week rather than no consensus as the latest contributions are very new. KaisaL (talk) 03:03, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, KaisaL (talk) 03:03, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Chile-related deletion discussions. Lemongirl942 (talk) 09:43, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep seems to be just enough to warrant notability i.e. prize winning and widely published. MurielMary (talk) 11:04, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Where exactly are these sources on the basis of which it is being claimed that it passes GNG? --Lemongirl942 (talk) 14:40, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As well as being known for her writing, she's known for her part in Hispanic-Canadian cultural life. This includes a variety of activities like participation in a government educational programme to do with migration, talks in schools, theatrical work, conferences etc. See [3] She's on the editorial board of a trilingual academic/literary publisher and plays host at Hispanic-Canadian literary events - like [4] and [5]. There's lit crit of her work online at [6] and [7] and she's mentioned or discussed in books at Google Books, unfortunately mostly snippet view, but see Poética de escritoras hispanoamericanas al alba del próximo milenio Perhaps this video interview for a mag, "Mundo en Español Canadá", online and monthly print edition, helps build her notability. I can't follow it but it does show her getting attention. Lelijg (talk) 13:12, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Correction - I probably shouldn't have included an article by her husband (?). Also, here's a dissertation with a chapter on her work. Using the spelling Gabrielle Etcheverry finds more about her university life and a couple of articles (Border work - resituating writers and Cultures of Coloniality: Latina/o Writing in Canada). Lelijg (talk) 17:31, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Music1201 ^talk 23:48, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Ipigott. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:35, 15 July 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.