Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/E.a. koetting


 * 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. per WP:SOFTDELETE Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 11:03, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

E.a. koetting

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Author of questionable notability. Google news search on the name shows zero results. Standard search shows a lot of primary sources, social media, and unreliable sources, but no significant coverage found from independent reliable sources. MikeWazowski (talk) 02:22, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 02:41, 4 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. While the information I'm pulling up about him certainly is interesting, there aren't enough reliable sources out there to show notability. I'd be willing to say that the Coast to Coast AM show could count as a reliable source, but the others on the article wouldn't be considered reliable sources per WP:RS. Writing a book does not guarantee notability regardless of whether it's a mainstream, indie, or self-published title. I know that it's harder for occult books to gain the sources needed to pass the strict notability guidelines, but there's no getting around that. Koetting just doesn't meet notability guidelines. He might have written a book and be known amongst his niche (for good or bad), but neither of those things paired together is enough to pass WP:AUTHOR. You must have multiple reliable secondary sources to show notability and that just isn't present here. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 05:57, 4 February 2012 (UTC)tokyogirl79
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 07:08, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Alpha_Quadrant   (talk)  00:47, 19 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.