Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amy Lake


 * 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. Black Kite (t)  01:36, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Amy Lake

 * – ( View AfD View log )

no indication of notability. Disputed prod. References show she has been published not that she is notable. noq (talk) 16:29, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

In my view, anyone who has five published books is notable. Also, I looked at your history. You seem to spend most of your time deleting other people's work, often over loud objections. How many books have you had published? Karen Anne (talk) 16:58, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Have you read the notability guidelines at WP:AUTHOR. It does not state that publishing a book is in itself notable. How does she meet the guidelines? noq (talk) 17:12, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment What does another user's history or the number of books that another user has published have to do with whether or not Amy Lake is a notable person? Please keep comments like that off of these pages. MisterRichValentine (talk) 21:07, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Karen Anne (talk) 17:35, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. Five books in the genre is a significant contribution #3.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 17:45, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Karen Anne (talk) 20:22, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. General notability guideline - No significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. Neutralitytalk 18:39, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
 * 'Uncertain. The notability will depend on whether there are substantial 3rd party reviews. It's possible. Worldcat shows about 212 holdings for Lady Pamela, and over 100 for Earl's Wife and Carriagemaker's daughter, which is   medium-low for this genre.  It does not list the other two, which are avail on the Kindle only and might count as self-published. ~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by DGG  (talk • contribs)  18:50, 30 October 2011‎ (UTC)
 * Delete, no notability, no reliable sources. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 19:58, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep . Her books are currently being reissued and were formerly out of print. How am I supposed to find reviews from years ago.  The fact that they are being reprinted indicates that someone in the profession thinks they are worthwhile.  They are being reissued by www.regencyreads.com (Belgrave House), which as far as I can tell is not Amy Lake, hence not self-published.  That web site appears to handle apparently 50 or so other authors.  It specifically says it accepts as submissions for its ebooks only books that were previously paper published. And I reserve the right to comment on someone who seems to view his role as deleting the work of others rather than producing any work of his own.  Just look at his talk page for others comments about this.
 * Please only !vote once. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 20:25, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
 * By the way, "review from years ago" would not qualify as reliable sources. The article is about the person, not the books, so reviews wouldn't do any good as far as building a biography.  In addition, please read WP:AGF and WP:NPA.  Personal attacks on other editors are not tolerated on Wikipdia.  The Mark of the Beast (talk) 20:25, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. General notability guideline - No significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. MisterRichValentine (talk) 21:07, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment There is a lack of consistency in your requests.  One says get reviews of her books, another says those don't matter because the article is about the person.  Well, the article is here because the person is an author.  And I can hardly do anything about the fact that the books are ten years old.  However, there is a favorable review by Harriet Klausner, who has her own Wikipedia entry, and therefore is presumably blessed by the Gods as a person of significance, at http://www.amazon.com/Pamela-Standard-Print-First-Romance/product-reviews/0786242329/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1  If you think my comments about Nog do not meet Wikipedia standards, you ought to take a look at his Talk page, some of the comments there make me look complimentary.

Karen Anne (talk) 22:04, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - this seems to meet the criteria for speedy deletion. That someone is an author is not a claim of notability; everyone has a job, and "author" is not inherently notable. As such, there is no claim of notability. --Nat Gertler (talk) 23:13, 30 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete: Does not qualify under the notability standards of either WP:GNG or WP:AUTHOR, and no independent reliable sources are cited in the article. —teb728 t c 23:29, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Mr. Eraser and the Wikipedia boy's club win.  I'm sure if this were an article about a male writing mysteries, no one would have proposed it for deletion.  Bathe in your testosterone, folks.  I'm off to delete all my contributions and then close my account.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karen Anne (talk • contribs) 10:29, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Searching Articles for Deletion, I find a number of male mystery writers whose pages have been nominated and even deleted. As such, consistency on that level is not a problem. --Nat Gertler (talk) 14:43, 31 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - clearly fails WP:BIO and WP:AUTHOR. ukexpat (talk) 13:23, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - non-notable author; gender and genre of the author are irrelevant, in spite of personal insinuations by an editor who has made several useful contributions in the past. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  13:52, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is a non-notable author and the publisher is equally non-notable, although even being published by a major house doesn't mean notability. Getting reviewed by the extremely dubious Harriet Klausner doesn't give you notability either. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 04:12, 1 November 2011 (UTC)tokyogirl79
 * 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.