Talk:Paula Brackston

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ethnicity?[edit]

Is she English or Welsh? Place of birth or residence does not equal ethnicity. Until this issue is resolved I'm recategorising the subject as British (nationality) instead of having the article in two unproven ethnicity categories. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:32, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Roger (Dodger67), I put both English and Welsh in the Nationality section of the infobox because nationality can be self-identified, whereas ethnicity is typically considered more of an inherited trait. There are two separate category options in the infobox distinguishing the two, so I figured using Nationality over Ethnicity would be the safer bet in creating this article. British is a wonderful substitution though for Paula Brackston since it encompasses the two anyway. Thank you for your criticism. PersnicketyPaul (talk) 15:35, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
PersnicketyPaul, actually nationality is a legal status, defined by citizenship laws. Ethnicity can be a minefield as self-identification as well as parentage play a role. In the UK ethnicity can be hard to clearly discern due to extensive intermarriage between English, Welsh, Scots and Irish over many centuries. My mother is a mix of English and Scots through several (known) generations of marriage across the Solway Firth. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:24, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Defending Paula Brackston[edit]

This page for New York Times bestselling author Paula Brackston (aka P. J. Brackston and P. J. Davy) should not be deleted because she is indeed a notable and relevant author. With several books featured in and reviewed by major publications like New York Times, Kirkus Reviews, Publishers Weekly, and Library Journal, Brackston has solidified her role as a prominent adult fiction novelist.

Minimal biographical information, in addition to lists of publications, for this Wikipedia article has been gathered from Brackston's websites, her publisher, Amazon, and Goodreads. The remaining sources are verifiable and industry-specific, and they support the written content included throughout this page.

Hi Goodreads is not a reliable source as per WP:NBOOKS "self-published sources like personal websites, blogs, bulletin boards, wikis, and similar media are not considered reliable. Social media review sites like Goodreads and LibraryThing do not qualify for this criteria." Domdeparis (talk) 09:34, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your criticisms. Regardless, the minimal use of these sources should not warrant deletion of this page. It is a stub and will be worked on in the future as more information becomes available. In the meantime, Paula Brackston is a popular author represented by a notable publisher, and her debut novel, The Witch's Daughter, was featured as a New York Times bestseller. Although her personal life and writings as P. J. Davy have not received great attention or media coverage, her other works—specifically those written as Paula Brackston and P. J. Brackston—have been featured and reviewed in several major publications, which should designate Brackston as a notable author worthy of representation on Wikipedia. PersnicketyPaul (talk) 22:07, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi PersnicketyPaul, at this point the page is not presently nominated for deletion--after locating sources, I removed the PROD. If it's renominated by a different process, a new notification with a link about where to comment will be placed at the top of the page, and as the page creator you should get a notification too. But Domdeparis's suggestions are useful for improving the entry, regardless. Innisfree987 (talk) 22:31, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Innisfree987 and Domdeparis, I appreciate the feedback and will be sure to steer away from personal website, social media like Goodreads, and authors' Amazon pages in the future. PersnicketyPaul (talk) 23:03, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Having looked at the other sources added I believe the article now meets the necessary criteria which is why I did not nominate it again but there are a number of sources that do nothing to add to the notability of the article. The various blogs and goodread links are unnecessary and actually detract from the article in my opinion. An article with a limited number of reliable sources points towards real notability. When these sources are drowned amongst blogs etc it looks like the creator is desperately trying to dress up a non notable subject to ensure the page stays. Domdeparis (talk) 06:39, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]