Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anne Elizabeth Moore


 * 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   speedy keep. It seems that there is strong enough support to close this as a speedy keep. (non-admin closure) Kevin Rutherford (talk) 20:01, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Anne Elizabeth Moore

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Subject not sufficiently notable: Does not meet WP:CREATIVE, I have searched for additional sources but have not been able to improve upon them. Sources listed are mostly unreliable or self published. Subjects only real claim to notability is as the author of Unmarketable: Brandalism, Copyfighting, Mocketing and the Erosion of Integrity which is a book I can find precious little mention of, in reliable sources. Ok, so I have now found some RS for the book, i'll leave the nomination up for the moment as I still don't believe WP:CREATIVE has been met. Pol430 talk to me 09:42, 9 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment - Let me get this straight, "Ok, so I have now found some RS for the book," but you're going ahead with an attempt to blow up this biography anyway?!? Lame. Carrite (talk) 16:28, 9 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - as co-publisher and editor of Punk Planet, one of the seminal magazines of 1990s American punk rock. That a university has held an exhibition of her zine art might be a clue that this is an individual with sufficient career achievement to merit encyclopedic biography. Carrite (talk) 16:32, 9 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep. Multiple reviews of her book(s) in major publications like Forbes is more than sufficient to satisfy the GNG as an author, and her editorial credits are also strong indicators of notability. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 16:49, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - a notable enough author of popular books, per sources found. Bearian (talk) 17:03, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep- Article of the individual needs further inline citations, but coverage in multiple distinct WP:RS seems to be established, although the LA Times review of her book is actually one sentence on its contents (in three paragraphs of their commentary), and is of the book, not the author; its inclusion here is appropriate unless & until the book has its own article.
 * Keep - Multiple reliable sources demonstrate notability per WP:GNG. Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:55, 9 April 2011 (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.