Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Homer Nearing

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. Geschichte (talk) 10:41, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Homer Nearing

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

The article itself has no sources. I was able to the listing of him getting his Ph.D. here [1], and I found a few citations to hius work in google scholar, but not nearly enough to pass the number 1 prong in academic notability. I was able to find that his listed work does exist from worldcat, although you have to be careful because his father with the same name was also a published writer, but in the field of music. I was able to find no secondary sources that actually discussed Nearing, just primary sources that showed that he existed, or that someone with this name existed who seems to maybe be the same person. John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:49, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

- As best I can tell this article has never had any sources since it was created in July of 2006.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:52, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:11, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:11, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Best review of his SF series I could find online, may not be RS (not sure if site has editorial control) but a starting point if anyone else wants to look further: Scide Splitters: The Sinister Researches of C. P. Ransom by H. Nearing, Jr.. 68.189.242.116 (talk) 16:48, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This subject's work was published by major publishers of the day including F&SF and Doubleday. In addition, I found a number of current scholarly works referencing his own academic papers including Poetry, Politics and Promises of Empire, Dire Straits: The Perils of Writing the Early Modern English Coastline from Leland to Milton, and Rethinking Shakespeare Source Study: Audiences, Authors, and Digital Technologies. Check out this Google Books search for more. To me this indicates he also meets the notability guidelines as an academic. I think the problem is he published in the mid 20th century so he's not mentioned online as much as more recent authors.--SouthernNights (talk) 20:31, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I updated the article with more info and citations to show his notability as a SF author, including his obituary in Locus Magazine and reviews of his work. Also worth noting this subject has an entry in The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction, which is an excellent indicator of notability.--SouthernNights (talk) 15:26, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as satisfying WP:BASIC per the added citations, and WP:HEY for SouthernNights's work. 68.189.242.116 (talk) 17:19, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~ I appreciate the work of SouthernNights to provide sourcing for the article. In looking at the sources, it does not appear the subject passes WP:AUTHOR and the citation count does not appear to lead to a pass of WP:ACADEMIC per the nomination. --Enos733 (talk) 20:32, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 00:36, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. Academic notability is not there (the distinguished professorship doesn't count; it was a bequest from his estate, not an honor given to him). But I think there is a case for author notability through major publisher attention, reviews, and inclusion in reference works. And the improvement from the stubby unsourced state of the article to its current version with considerable sourced detail about both his fiction and his life makes this worth keeping. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:56, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, for the reasons given above. But also merely for encyclopaedic interest of our readers: although I agree with David Eppstein's comment about the distinguished professorship, presumably future holders of the Homer C. Nearing, Jr. Distinguished Professorship will be eligible for Wikipedia articles themselves, and to be described as such in their own articles, in which case some of our readers are going to wonder who Homer C. Nearing, Jr., actually was. We owe it to them to tell them. (to clarify: endowing a chair shouldn't automatically confer notability, but if someone's half-way notable and teetering on the brink, to my mind endowing a chair could tip the balance based on the needs of our readers' curiosity). Elemimele (talk) 12:32, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:NAUTHOR and WP:HEY. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 17:22, 28 December 2021 (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.