Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeanne Munn Bracken

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. No consensus for a particular outcome has arisen. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:49, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jeanne Munn Bracken

[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)

Probably not notable. The prose text of the article claims for her no significance. She's listed as the winner of a few awards, but though a couple of them sound like they could be notable, a search doesn't turn up evidence that they are. (For example, a search for "national press association" "best column" yields seven hits.) A Google search for her yields no coverage—the closest I found was a Kirkus review of one of her books. A Google Scholar search] did yield in her favor one book with 24 citations, but that's all. Largoplazo (talk) 22:42, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Seems to fail WP:BASIC, no indication of notability in the article other than being the recipient of a couple awards. I have won awards, that doesn't make me notable. PCHS-NJROTC ^{(Messages)Have a blessed day.} 02:57, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 11:58, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:26, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:BIO scope_creep (talk) 14:54, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as worldcat as shown at the bottom of the article gives the details that her works comprise over 2300 library holdings which seems a significant number and indicates that they should have been reviewed if they are in such large library circulation, Atlantic306 (talk) 19:43, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment led me to wonder whether we have an explicit notability criterion based on library holdings. Do we? Largoplazo (talk) 23:03, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ad Orientem (talk) 02:36, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep plenty of critical attention. I added it to the article. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 00:00, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:53, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep author multiple books who are well read and have been reviewed. Also recognized as one of the New Times Librarian of the Year in 2005. Ample information from reliable sources to write a her biography. Sydney Poore/FloNight ♥♥♥♥ 03:54, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

She didn't win a New York Times Librarian of the Year Award because there is no such thing. In 2005, she was one of 27 recipients of a "Librarian Award". Largoplazo (talk) 04:16, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, using gsearch found the following reviews for Bracken's book Children With Cancer: Kirkus Reviews - "An excellent and comprehensive reference guide for parents of children with cancer ... An indispensable guide for parents of children who are struck with cancer.", The Pulse (a magazine of Dartmouth College) (short review:)- ".. this monograph is a unique and well considered examination of how parents can best help a child survive the cancer experience.", library Journal - "Highly recommended, this will be very helpful to parents/caregivers of children with cancer.", Doody's Reviews - "This overview of pediatric cancers and treatments discusses coping and support for these patients and their families. .. This is a well-written resource for families and children experiencing pediatric cancer. The compilation of resources in the book is priceless. This update is justified by the many advances in pediatric cancer care since the original publication. 87/100.", Surgical Oncology - need to puchase review, so enough to meet WP:NBOOK (even though there are the dreaded trade reviews here:)) btw WorldCat shows that it is held in around 1400 libraries, a good indication that reviews will be available as shown above. ps. i will now let others dig up reviews of Munn's other publications:)Coolabahapple (talk) 12:40, 12 July 2018 (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.