Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tom Kratman
I agree that the Sad Puppies debacle is covered by , and does not establish notability. I've been trying to see whether it's possible to get him over the  bar on the strength of criterion 3 - a well known body of work that has been subject of multiple independent reviews. I'm struggling - the best I've found is https://www.publishersweekly.com/9781416573838 this (plus a few other reviews of his books linked to from there) in Publishers Weekly, and https://sanfranciscobookreview.com/product/come-and-take-them/ this in San Francisco Book Review. I'm not sure either of these work though. The Publishers Weekly reviews are very short, more of a synopsis than a review, and they don't have a reviewers name attached to them - I think they churn out one of these for basically every book that gets published - I don't see how that establishes notability. The SFBR review is slightly more substantial, and has a name - but I don't think it's a staff reviewer, as far as I can work out this is a volunteer contributor (they have a link saying 'Become a reviewer'), so this is essentially . Would like to know what others think before !voting though. Cheers
— User:Girth, 15:03, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:BLP1E||WP:NAUTHOR||WP:UGC (Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons)