Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amy Hillgren Peterson


 * 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 of the debate was Delete. Deathphoenix ʕ 06:18, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Amy Hillgren Peterson
At this time, the author appears to be self/vanity published only and does not really contribute to the understanding of American Literature, even in her narrow genre. If at some point she publishes with a traditional publisher or wins one of the purported prizes listed below, a new article can be created. Bookworm51104 16:01, 13 May 2006 (UTC) *Weak Keep seems vaguely notable to me, won the American Book Award. JK Rowling she is not, but I see no reason to delete. -- E ivindt@c 22:45, 13 May 2006 (UTC) Delete as NN after review of Metros22 link. Thanks :) -- E ivindt@c 02:02, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment The nominator of this article has 5 contributions, all of which are related to this article for deletion. Metros232 16:24, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Google comes up with just over 400 hits for her. Her books rank in the millions for Amazon book sales.  Metros232 16:24, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as (probable) non-notable author. Funnybunny (talk/QRVS) 16:36, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete This author does not appear on any official lists of winners for the American Book Award. All press releases relating to this author's supposed win were released by the author herself.  Furthermore, the likening of "The Swedish Lie" to the "Joy Luck Club" was made by the author herself in her own press releases.  This appears to be a case of 1. claiming to win an award that was not won and 2. self-promotion.  Any buzz about the author is a result of the author herself. {{unsigned|71.16.188.227}
 * To back this up, here's a list of winners since 1980. Metros232 00:40, 14 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete How long does this process have to go on, or how many votes does an entry have to get before it is just put out of its misery??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bookworm51104 (talk • contribs)
 * Have striken duplicate vote by the nominator. You cannot vote more than once. An AfD discussion lasts for one week. Some may be closed early under special circumstances (which this one doesn't meet) and some may be re-listed for another week if not sufficient discussion takes place (probably won't happen with this one). Please remember to sign your posts. --JLaTondre 19:15, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I knew there had to be a better way to sign other than doing it manually (which I genuinely forgot to do the last time). Thanks for directing me to the instructions for signing. Let's see if it works this time. Four tilde? Bookworm51104 21:52, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep - in spite of the controversy - if she IS the first American novelist to write about the concept of Jante's Law, that would seem to be not nothing. I agree with the rest, that most of the hype appears to have been generated by the author herself. I also agree with the first poster that it may seem to be a "remove without prejudice" thing - if she does ever accomplish anything independent Wiki writers would find noteworthy, then a nonbiased article can be created. I'm going to stick with the weak keep because if she has introduced Jante's Law to non-Scandinavian America, that is something to consider. If the issue is that it probably meets Wiki standards for autobiography/self-promotion but does not meet the standard for notability, then I sway to reluctant delete. My official vote stands, however.Littleshakespeare 21:59, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Relisted for clearer consensus. Computerjoe 's talk 19:50, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep 450 ghits Computerjoe 's talk 19:51, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and above. Notability that doesn't exist, an award that wasn't awarded, sales that haven't happened.  And is this lady really the very first American novelist -- with a century's worth of novels about Scandinavian immigrants from Upton Sinclair on out -- to introduce the (scarcely remarkable) concept that Scandinavian village culture is insular and has its quirks?  I certainly wouldn't take it on her unsupported word, even if the claim is credible, which it really isn't.  Ravenswing 20:06, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:NN^3. Up and coming is the kiss of death. We record only the tired and worn out. Dominick (TALK) 20:12, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Delete (see below) WP is not paper, published author, selling on Amazon, someone buying her book on Amazon may want to look her up on WP. Crum375 20:41, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Just checked the current proposed nn-bio notability threshold at WP:BIO and it states that published authors with 5000+ copies are in:
 * "Published authors, editors, and photographers who have written books with an audience of 5,000 or more or in periodicals with a circulation of 5,000 or more"
 * Crum375 21:20, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * comment' Article does not prove she sold 5000 copies. Dominick (TALK) 22:40, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * True - but the Amazon site for one of her books says it's basically sold out - I suspect that probably means >5000. And this is not necessarily the first batch, and could be sold thru non-Amazon channels too. Crum375 22:47, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Changed to Delete - I now realize this author appears to be a fraud, as others have attested above. On her web page, where she sells writing services, she claims:
 * "My novel, "The Swedish Lie" has won several awards, including the American Book Award from the Before Columbus Foundation."
 * When you look up the award list, here she is nowhere to be found. Couple this with the 1.7-2.1M ranking on Amazon, we are led to nn-bio. So let's wait till she hits the big time, and hope she cleans up her act along the way. (If I am wrong in my analysis please feel free to correct me) Crum375 01:20, 19 May 2006 (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.