Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Denny Sheehan (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 09:02, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Denny Sheehan
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

BLP on a self-published author. NYT covers his search for a quiet apartment, not his accomplishments as an author. AGF for the offline "Writer Magazine" article, but this article is the only WP:RS coverage of this author, and as such, does not satisfy the plurality of sources required by the GNG. Liv it ⇑ Eh?/What? 17:04, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. The second source (Writers Magazine) is good, but the first source is more concerned with apartments and using Sheehan's search as an example than it is about Sheehan as a writer. This is not the type of coverage that is needed to pass WP:AUTHOR or even WP:GNG. Generally speaking, when you have to use Amazon as a source that means that there's not much notability there.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 17:36, 14 February 2012 (UTC)tokyogirl79
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 13:41, 15 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. It should have been speedied as a previously deleted non-notable subject.  In fact, it should be speedied now.  It should then be salted so that other editors aren't forced to waste their time with this WP:ADVERT in the future.  I've looked for WP:RS to satisfy WP:BK or WP:AUTHOR and have come up with absolute bupkis.  There is apparently no such thing as "Writer Magazine" or "Writers Magazine," and in any case it's difficult to believe that the guy's book would be trumpeted by any magazine as a "self-publishing success story" when its Amazon ranking is a paltry 519,630.  A closing admin should save us time and speedy this off the face of the Internet right now and then make liberal use of the salt shaker. Qworty (talk) 04:04, 16 February 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.