Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A V Denham


 * 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   delete. I am happy to userfy if the original author requests it. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 18:43, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

A V Denham

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

No indication of WP:notability. Only references are either not significant or not independent. Disputed prod noq (talk) 00:20, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Denham has written at least nine published books which are available for purchase at amazon.com. Denham meets the WP:CREATIVE notability standard: The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work. NJ Wine (talk) 00:35, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment Being available on Amazon is not one of the notability criteria. Your partial quote of criteria 3 of WP:CREATIVE missed out the bit about being the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews and I see no sign of that. The Copac reference is a directory listing - not significant coverage. noq (talk) 14:37, 20 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 03:24, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep per NJ Wine. Copac is a significant, independent reference. Note also that the article's creator is currently in the process of sourcing additional references.  Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:01, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * The test for notability is whether the coverage of the topic in a source is significant, not whether the source publication is significant. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:28, 23 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment My understanding of consensus opinion is that published authors are not automatically notable. Their publications need to be established as being significant or well-known. Simply being on Copac or Amazon doesn't do that. The article is only about 24 hours old, so I'll give the creator a chance to find some references before I !vote, but at the moment I don't think this article meets our criteria for inclusion. (I wish it did, since it was created by a new editor that I don't want to discourage, but that isn't a good enough reason to weaken our standards.) --Tango (talk) 10:35, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment I have to agree that being listed on Copac just means your books exist. I have tried a search on LexisNexis and HighBeam but have yet to find any reviews, awards or other mention so far. It would help to know what her books were about, or a bit more about her, in order to search more widely. Denham is not a particularly uncommon name. --Fæ (talk) 14:17, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment I saw this shortly after it was nominated and first response was that it was not notable. That remains my opinion and I do not understand why Amazon and Copac are thought to confer notability, nor do I see how this is "a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work" - so far the failure to find evidence for this (and I searched too) suggests that her work is not notable. But I'll withhold my !vote and hope that the two editors who voted Keep can explain further what they see as showing notability. Dougweller (talk) 20:46, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Ok, even time is passed and I don't want to forget this. Clearly there has been no evidence found that this author passes our notability criteria, as the two other editors commenting above have also said. Dougweller (talk) 05:11, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Per Dougweller. Several people (including me) have tried to find sources to establish the notability of this author, and have failed. I have to conclude that she isn't notable. --Tango (talk) 20:08, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:AUTHOR, but with no disrespect to her achievements. One or more of Denham's titles may be separately notable, but that does not mean that our policies consider that she is, per WP:NOTINHERITED. -- Trevj (talk) 10:27, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Userfication as I see no harm in someone chipping away at improving a userspace draft. Based on the multiple searches done so far, it seems unlikely that quality sources will demonstrate notability in the near future. --Fæ (talk) 10:39, 30 May 2012 (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.