- 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. Tone 14:04, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Diana Hignutt
- Diana Hignutt ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Author does not meet notability standards established in WP:AUTHOR. Owen ( talk) 08:23, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
- Delete - Lack of notability. Mohammad Sally ( talk) 13:15, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 16:43, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
- Delete - At present this article is completely unsourced (there is a single reference, but it is to a dead link for a small local weekly newspaper and the purported title of said article suggests that it is a local special interest piece about Hignutt's marriage as a transwoman to another woman--hardly suitable for establishing Hignutt's notability as an author) and searches for additional reliable sources have turned up nothing for me, just a couple social media accounts, an amazon page for her one book (which seems to be published under Amazon's amateur self-publishing scheme that allows anyone to sell their writing on a kindle, not an actual publishing house), and a couple of blurbs in a small blog. More or less a WP:SNOW case to me; not notable under either WP:GNG or WP:NAUTHOR. Snow let's rap 21:16, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
- Comment, hi
snow, its great that you believe this is a
snow being snowy yourself
, c'mon coola, stay focussed, oh, right, sorry:), found an article from the
philly weekly about the couple, which could be used to flesh out the article (this might be the "dead link" article), if kept, btw rather then a "small local weekly newspaper" phil wkly appears to be quite a large state paper if this is anything to go by - "Circulation: 86,000 (as of June 2014) .. Philadelphia Weekly is the largest audited-circulation weekly newspaper in Pennsylvania, distributed at nearly 2,000 locations reaching a readership close to 400,000."
[1] (although is this site coi?), but i digress:), also found a couple of books reviews;
Publishers Weekly review of Empress of Clouds - "The author, herself a transsexual, sensitively handles the book's transsexual theme, but the abundance of superior fantasy fiction in the marketplace, some of it more effectively gender-bending than this workmanlike effort, presents a challenge."
[2], and
International Foundation for Gender Education review of Moonsword - " Diana Hignutt?s first novel, Moonsword, is just such a fantasy, one that penetrates to the heart of transgender truth. .. The story is full of twists and turns that captivate the reader. Anyone who likes science fiction or fantasy will enjoy Moonsword. Those readers who happen to understand transgender experience from the inside out will find here a mythic tale that penetrates the mystery and the truth of being differently gendered."
[3], but more is needed for Hignutt to meet wp notability.
Coolabahapple (
talk) 16:21, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
- Hello Coola! I'm afraid that these additional materials don't really change the equation for me much when it comes to the notability of Ms. Hignutt as an author. The Publisher's Weekly "review" is a four sentence that is essentially a bare bones plot synopsis inset to a form sales page for the book, plus a one-line analysis of the quality of the book. The IFGE review of Hignutt's first work is similarly just a couple of paragraphs--I'm afraid that's just not enough to establish the kind of significant or detailed coverage we'd need to justify an article on this book, let alone it's author by mere association. Could you please provide a link to the additional source (the Philadelphia Weekly article)? My strong suspicion is that, if it is what the title suggests it is (a local human interest piece on a couple, one of whom happens to be transsexual), it isn't going to do much of anything to bolster the case for Hignutt being an encyclopedically relevant subject in herself. But that reservation not withstanding, I'd still like to review that source.
Snow
let's rap 05:21, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
- oops, sorry snow, here it is, btw agree with your above response, hence why mine is a "comment" but still on the fence as a couple more refs may tip the balance (where are the lgbt studies editors when we need them?:)). Coolabahapple ( talk) 07:00, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
- Hello Coola! I'm afraid that these additional materials don't really change the equation for me much when it comes to the notability of Ms. Hignutt as an author. The Publisher's Weekly "review" is a four sentence that is essentially a bare bones plot synopsis inset to a form sales page for the book, plus a one-line analysis of the quality of the book. The IFGE review of Hignutt's first work is similarly just a couple of paragraphs--I'm afraid that's just not enough to establish the kind of significant or detailed coverage we'd need to justify an article on this book, let alone it's author by mere association. Could you please provide a link to the additional source (the Philadelphia Weekly article)? My strong suspicion is that, if it is what the title suggests it is (a local human interest piece on a couple, one of whom happens to be transsexual), it isn't going to do much of anything to bolster the case for Hignutt being an encyclopedically relevant subject in herself. But that reservation not withstanding, I'd still like to review that source.
Snow
let's rap 05:21, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:47, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:47, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
- 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.