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. (non-admin closure) –– FormalDude (talk) 11:16, 12 October 2022 (UTC) reply

Rimi B. Chatterjee

Rimi B. Chatterjee (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)

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

Seemingly WP:NN author failing each element of WP:AUTHOR. While some books have been "shortlisted" for awards that she did not win, it appears she won a minor award, the Sharp Book History award for one book. [1]

This article was created and heavily edited by the subject.

Toddst1 ( talk) 13:45, 5 October 2022 (UTC) reply

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Toddst1 ( talk) 13:45, 5 October 2022 (UTC) reply
• Keep per WP:AUTHOR - Multiple links to book reviews for two books were removed by the nominator in advance of this nomination, but I restored them. Beccaynr ( talk) 13:52, 5 October 2022 (UTC) reply

Books being reviewed establishes WP:NBOOK, not WP:AUTHOR unless the author has created a significant or well-known work, which is not the case here. Toddst1 ( talk) 13:56, 5 October 2022 (UTC) reply

WP:AUTHOR#3 can be supported by a collective body of work, with multiple reviews (she is the author of multiple notable works), and she won a SHARP DeLong Prize [2] (publisher citation also removed by the nominator in advance of the nomination). Beccaynr ( talk) 14:07, 5 October 2022 (UTC) reply

Ok, so you would need to show that her collective work is "well known" or significant which it does not appear to be. I see no references to her collective work anywhere or any coverage of her from independent sources. A few reviews of her books show nothing about the author. Toddst1 ( talk) 14:17, 5 October 2022 (UTC) reply

The reviews are about her work, so it shows something about her. Multiple notable works are a typical support for notability of an author's article, and another one of her works won critical attention in the form of an award. In the Wikipedia Library, additional sources include: Suparno Banerjee, " Alternative Dystopia: Science, Power, and Fundamentalism in Rimi B. Chatterjee's "Signal Red"", Journal of the Fantastic in the Arts, Vol. 20, No. 1 (75) (2009), pp. 24-41, and Signal Red is analyzed in Sami Ahmad Khan, " The Others in India's Other Futures" Science Fiction Studies, Vol. 43, No. 3, Indian SF (November 2016), pp. 479-495.

She is also quoted in the Times of India as faculty at the department of English at Jadavpur University in 2012 (via Gale), in 2014 (via Gale) as a professor and "a constant source of support for the organizers" of an activist event, as an English department professor in 2018, 2 (via Gale), in DNA India as "Translator, linguist and professor of English literature" in 2017 (via Gale), in The Telegraph as a "science fiction writer" in 2018 (via Gale), and as "the head of the English department" in 2020 (via Gale). There is also a bylined announcement in TOI in 2013 (via Gale) about her graphic novels Incredible Splendour and The King of the Green Island. Beccaynr ( talk) 15:05, 5 October 2022 (UTC) reply

There is also a review that includes her contribution: "The Gollancz Book of South Asian Science Fiction by Tarun Saint - Review" ( Free Press Journal 2019) (via Gale) (specifically notes her work "A Night Joking Clown" as one of "the best of the lot"); The Telegraph notes she is one of the contributing translators to The Crazy Tales of Pagla Dashu and Co. 2012 (via Gale), and her work "Zigsa" is noted (in LONGFORM: An Anthology of Graphic Narratives, Volume 1) in an article about comics in The Telegraph in 2018 (via Gale). She is quoted as "a novelist" in The Telegraph in 2010 (via Gale), quoted and mentioned as "published work in English and teaches at Jadavpur University" and "now working on a science fiction novel that is set 600 years into the future and plans to write a chick lit some day" by TOI in 2012 (via Gale), quoted as a "Translator and professor of English Literature" by DNA in 2017 (via Gale), and her work Black Light is mentioned in an article about women writers by IANS in 2011 (via Gale); she is also quoted for her opinion as a novelist by The Indian Express in 2011 (via Gale), and as "author and English professor at Jadavpur University, Kolkata" in 2009 (via Gale). Beccaynr ( talk) 15:55, 5 October 2022 (UTC) reply

• Keep the book reviews should pass AUTHOR, but this is a mess of an article. It needs more biographical information and better formatting. Might even pass ACADEMIC, she's got a fair bit of citations [ https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Ib9_yUAAAAAJ&hl=en]. Oaktree b ( talk) 14:50, 5 October 2022 (UTC) reply
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Beccaynr ( talk) 15:59, 5 October 2022 (UTC) reply
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Beccaynr ( talk) 16:01, 5 October 2022 (UTC) reply
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Beccaynr ( talk) 16:03, 5 October 2022 (UTC) reply
• Keep. Multiple reviews of multiple books in major newspapers clearly passes WP:AUTHOR and provide in-depth coverage of the subject's notability, also passing WP:GNG. For sportspeople, we expect our in-depth coverage to be about their sporting achievements. For politicians, we expect it to be about their political offices and accomplishments. Same for authors. The fact that the coverage we have on this author focuses on their authored works and not on their taste in street food or other unimportant biographical details is irrelevant; it is in-depth, independent coverage. And the nominator's removal of the main sources that provide notability immediately prior to nominating this for deletion is not a good look. — David Eppstein ( talk) 16:09, 5 October 2022 (UTC) reply
• Keep per the multiple-reviews-of-multiple-books standard, aka WP:WDYECOAATBA (What Did You Expect Coverage Of An Author To Be About). XOR'easter ( talk) 16:52, 5 October 2022 (UTC) reply
• Keep: As the user David Eppstein said. Contributor008 ( talk) 16:56, 5 October 2022 (UTC) reply
• Keep per Beccaynr & David Eppstein. I think the nominator has a fundamental misconception as to how WP:AUTHOR is applied. Espresso Addict ( talk) 02:57, 6 October 2022 (UTC) reply
• Keep She meets the criteria and notability to have an article. aaronneallucas ( talk) 14:04, 7 October 2022 (UTC) reply
• Keep passes WP:AUTHOR, per per Beccaynr & David Eppstein. ZanciD ( talk) 19:59, 10 October 2022 (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.