Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carla van Raay


 * 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 keep. (non-admin closure) sst✈(discuss) 18:24, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Carla van Raay
Doesn't meet Notability (people). No notability is asserted as far as I can see. Three sources, two of which are primary. The only non-primary source is a review from someone who doesn't appear to be notable. -- Kethrus &#124;talk to me 12:04, 30 October 2015 (UTC)


 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. --  Kethrus &#124;talk to me 12:08, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. --  Kethrus &#124;talk to me 12:08, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. --  Kethrus &#124;talk to me 12:08, 30 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. Sources don't demonstrate sufficient notability. The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 12:17, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete as I simply see no obvious better improvement. Pinging past users and .  SwisterTwister   talk  04:01, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep Sources I found about her and her books are:
 * Those with access can get more from AustLit eg. Enough for GNG. duffbeerforme (talk) 10:21, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Those with access can get more from AustLit eg. Enough for GNG. duffbeerforme (talk) 10:21, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Those with access can get more from AustLit eg. Enough for GNG. duffbeerforme (talk) 10:21, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Those with access can get more from AustLit eg. Enough for GNG. duffbeerforme (talk) 10:21, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Those with access can get more from AustLit eg. Enough for GNG. duffbeerforme (talk) 10:21, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Those with access can get more from AustLit eg. Enough for GNG. duffbeerforme (talk) 10:21, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Those with access can get more from AustLit eg. Enough for GNG. duffbeerforme (talk) 10:21, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Those with access can get more from AustLit eg. Enough for GNG. duffbeerforme (talk) 10:21, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Those with access can get more from AustLit eg. Enough for GNG. duffbeerforme (talk) 10:21, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Those with access can get more from AustLit eg. Enough for GNG. duffbeerforme (talk) 10:21, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Those with access can get more from AustLit eg. Enough for GNG. duffbeerforme (talk) 10:21, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Those with access can get more from AustLit eg. Enough for GNG. duffbeerforme (talk) 10:21, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Those with access can get more from AustLit eg. Enough for GNG. duffbeerforme (talk) 10:21, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 05:18, 7 November 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:43, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
 * delete would WP:BLP1E apply here. She is only known for one thing. LibStar (talk) 05:46, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
 * No it doesn't apply. A book is not an event. Coverage around that first book was maintained over an extended period, from over six months before it's release to years afterwards. She has coverage for more than one book. She maintained a profile to help publicise her books and for her work as a "counsellor, speaker and workshop leader" . duffbeerforme (talk) 07:19, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Another review of her second book --
 * Some online coverage BBC, Trouw
 * Dutch review of first book --
 * Coverage of a public lecture in the Netherlands --
 * Also reviewed in Issue Details: no. 263 August 2004 of Australian Book Review.
 * Multiple translations exist.
 * Her first book has clearly "won significant critical attention" WP:AUTHOR and has sold over 300,000 copies. duffbeerforme (talk) 07:29, 24 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep. Notable as an author. I don't generally support using the GNG when it yields a result opposed to common sense, but it certainly does have a major role, as it does here, where it  supports a common-sense decision in contrast to various quibbles,such as an attempt to extend BLP1E way beyond its intended meaning.    DGG ( talk ) 03:14, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. as per DGG. Eden&#39;s Apple (talk) 17:56, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep generally our AUTHOR and similar guidelines are constructed to more or less consider coverage of works of a writer/artist as coverage of the artist, the topics tend to be pretty intermingled. (One can see AUTHOR as a reframing of GNG rather than an exception to it. In any case, that's been our usual practice.) DGG's comments on BLP1E are also on-point. Sources provided by Duffbearforme appear sufficient. --joe deckertalk 06:51, 28 November 2015 (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.