Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Semih Çalışkan

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. (non-admin closure) — Yash^talk stalk 06:16, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semih Çalışkan

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

Per WP:DEL8 non-notable Turkish author with one book; fails all points at WP:AUTHOR. Mathglot (talk) 19:42, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This author is the subject of a good bit of independent coverage in reliable news outlets and is the author of a best-selling novel in Turkey. While the author's media coverage may not be in English, that doesn't matter with regards to establishing his obvious notability.--SouthernNights (talk) 17:26, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Mathglot (talk) 21:13, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. Mathglot (talk) 21:13, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:53, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep One of the nice thing about Turkey is that they use the Latin alphabet, here's a gNews search on him:[1]. I ran a couple of them through google translate and despite the garble factor it is easy to see that he is, indeed, a hot young novelist. (I actually did not intend that double entendre, but it works: he fills a dinner jacket to advantage.)E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:47, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm not bothered by the fact that there are no English references, nor by the fact that Turkish uses Latin (I read non-Latin scripts as well). What I am bothered by, is that nobody is citing any policies or guidelines in their responses, which to my way of thinking, makes them all WP:ILIKEIT which are not countable votes. Please go back to WP:AUTHOR which has four bullet points; and this author, as I see it, meets none of the four criteria, therefore is not notable. I'm willing to be persuaded otherwise, but please cite policies, not preferences, and maybe I'll come around; thanks. Mathglot (talk) 10:49, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:18, 7 May 2017 (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.