Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diane Stein


 * 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 (no consensus) and CLEANUP. This page completely lacks citations and references. (And no, Stein's website is not a reference.) In fact, most of the Google hits cited by M Alan Kazlev seem to be for sites selling Stein's books (e.g., Amazon, eBay, etc.) rather than for real book reviews. I am not commenting on whether Stein is notable or not; however, the article must be adequately referenced and cited, and the citations given must prove Stein's notability. Larry V (talk &#124; contribs) 03:07, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Diane Stein

 * -- (View AfD)

Please forgive the fact that someone how I managed to double the paragraphs which should only be 2 not 4!!!


 * Strong Keep - prolific and popular feminist pagan/wiccan author. Just consider how many books she has written!  I find it astonishing that this page has been even nominated for deletion, unless it be some sort of pov bias against subjects outside mainstream materialism.  And even if that were a good reason (which it isjn't), there are heaps of articles on wikipedia, e.g. creation science, which are far more "lunatic fringe".   Or if it is the fact that the page is stubby and incomplete has nothing to do with the notability or lack thereof of the subject. Typing in "diane stein" review gives 40,800 hits on Google. Take your choice of independent reviews from there!  M Alan Kazlev 11:38, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

ForrestLane42 16:17, 28 December 2006 (UTC)ForrestLane42
 * Strong Merger changed to Strong Delete- After reconsidering and seeing recent replies, I think this page is a delete, it wouldn't serve any purpose to merge this page, so its a delete. I believe we have three YEAS for delete and 2 Nos for delete. Consensus seems to be in and someone can please delete this page, however thats done.


 * Strong keep per Alan. --Mallarme 19:09, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 13:30, 29 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete unless appropriate sources are provided that establish notability. As of right now, the article is merely a list of the names of her books with a one-sentence intro, thats it.  No outside sources other than her own website are provided so notability has not been established.  Given the amount of books she has written (if the article is correct) she probably is notable so I am willing to change my opinion to keep if proper sources are given. --The Way 07:51, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - no references provided means no notability established. Those wanting to keep the article are responsible for providing the references, not those advocating for its deletion.  Hatch68 21:16, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep searching through the google hits yields a number of legitimate looking (non-blog or forum) book reviews- e.g. . It's difficult to judge whether these are truly non-trivial, but I default to keep.--Kubigula (talk) 23:34, 2 January 2007 (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.