Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David L. Pulver

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 04:32, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] David L. Pulver

David L. Pulver (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Article does not demonstrate notability per WP:BIO for inhouse copywriter for various publishers. Long list of works for gaming instructions is not independent source. Notability to come. --Gavin Collins 08:59, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Update I've added even more information, linking in other existing Wikipedia articles. --Craw-daddy | T | 22:13, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. WP:BIO says "A person is generally notable if they meet any of the following standards."
  1. The person has received significant recognized awards or honors (true and mentioned in page)
  2. The person has demonstrable wide name recognition (I think true in field)
  3. The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field. (true: Transhuman Space by itself would be that.)
  • One standard needed, and at least two are met. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.129.253.208 (talk) 21:01, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. For all the reasons stated above. --Loremaster 22:23, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. Pulver's one of the most famous GURPS supplement authors, his works are used as source material even outside the game.Bryan Derksen 23:34, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - well known author in the field, has won awards, reff'ed article... Spurious nom. Georgewilliamherbert 00:31, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Lack of sources is reason for improvement, not deletion. Person meets all three standards of WP:BIO listed. Nomination is factually wrong, referring to a game designer as an 'inhouse copywriter' and books of rolepaying games as 'gaming instructions'. Nominator has been corrected before on their previous attempts to delete every single article related to the GURPS game, yet persists in using incorrect terms in the nominations. Edward321 23:16, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep In view of the recognitions received by Pulver. Moreover, as Edward321 says, calling him an "inhouse copywriter for various publishers" is a bit like calling Stephen King an inhouse copywriter for his publishers. --Goochelaar 08:05, 8 September 2007 (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.