Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emma Hannigan


 * 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. Wizardman 00:23, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Emma Hannigan

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Real author with one published book, which got a few minor reviews. Claimed besteller status highly dubious. Seems to fail WP:AUTHOR Passportguy (talk) 16:48, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: this search established that the book exists, that's it. The Independent search link in the article gives nothing (and I'm removing it). 207.157.121.50 (talk) 17:56, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Note--there was something there, but not much. An article with one paragraph on the book (I added URL to the article), the announcement that it exists, and a biographical, personal note on the author (on a topic which the article didn't mention, so I didn't add that). It doesn't alter my opinion. 207.157.121.50 (talk) 18:01, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:16, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:17, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak keep The INdependent covers the author and the book a bit. Seems worth including? ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:58, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

keep meets WP:N Pink cloudy sky (talk) 20:43, 6 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete One review does not establish notability. Drawn Some (talk) 21:41, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Book in in zero worldcat libraries. One short paragraph in a group review, which I can asa nondistinctive listing, not a review at all.


 * Weak Delete - There is also this article devoted solely to her. But this still represents scant coverage and not enough to meet notability. -- Whpq (talk) 17:17, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:15, 14 May 2009 (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.