Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eley Williams


 * 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 of the debate was delete. - Mailer Diablo 01:29, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Eley Williams
Vanity. Fredrik | talk 01:05, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

No Google news hits either. Capitalistroadster 05:52, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. If someone can verify that she is indeed soon to be a published author with Harper-Collins, that's good enough for me. The page is a mess, though, and needs fixing. wikipediatrix 03:58, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment. But not for WP:BIO - "Published authors, editors, and photographers who have written books with an audience of 5,000 or more or in periodicals with a circulation of 5,000 or more". If book sales reach 5,000, she can have an article. - Dalbury (talk) 15:07, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * That's why I specified "Harper-Collins". Due to the nature of the book industry, it is a given that 5,000 copies of ANY book from such a major publishing house will be sold to stores that pick it up (even though the majority of them may end up returned for credit and/or remaindered). If this was a self-published chapbook, local imprint, or vanity press, then of course, no way. However, there's no mention of her on the Harper-Collins website, so it would appear that whoever posted the article is misinformed at best. wikipediatrix 01:04, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete No verifiable evidence that she is a noted poetry writer. 46 Google results for Eley Williams with the first page being genealogy pages..
 * Delete. The only verifiable claim is that she won the "Christoper Tower Poetry Prize in 2005 (winning the £1,500 first prize)" - unfortunately, the first prize is £3,000, and there isn't a £1,500 prize, so the only verifiable claim is wrong. TheMadBaron 06:23, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, due to lack of verifiable evidence for notability. Superm401 | Talk 10:02, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete: Vandalism (knowingly false statements) in the graffitist's agenda. Geogre 13:03, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not notable. (unsigned vote by Herostratus)
 * Delete per nom, NN. - Dalbury (talk) 15:07, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. per dalbury. -- WB 22:57, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball Ejrrjs | What? 23:34, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Much as I was interested in the information, delete per policy at WP:BIO. Be sure to come back and make it again, when the person qualifies! Jacqui  ★ 00:26, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete but recreate when/if more notable. Turnstep 03:24, 15 November 2005 (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.