Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Erin O Wallace


 * 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. Mkdw talk 01:15, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Erin O Wallace

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:GNG and WP:WRITER Ramaksoud2000 (Talk to me) 22:50, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  czar   &middot;   &middot;  23:01, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions.  czar   &middot;   &middot;  23:01, 30 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment 10 minutes from article creation to AfD, with no intermediate steps to improve or at least tag the article? WP:BEFORE is more than just a good idea. - Dravecky (talk) 23:59, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
 * What would you suggest? Notability can't be improved(on your own). I've already checked for the subject's notability and have not found it. Ramaksoud2000 (Talk to me) 00:03, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually, I've found a couple of sources and am adding them to the article. I would suggest a Google search, a notability tag, a message to the creator in their talk page, then a PROD tag before taking an article to AfD. 10 minutes from creation to AfD with no intermediate steps and no clean-up efforts is just biting the newbie. - Dravecky (talk) 00:49, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Weak keep as I've found a few sources, one more on point than the other, and added them to the article. While Wallace's latest book is from a notable publisher, she may better meet notability guidelines as a hotelier than as an author alone. More sources would be better. - Dravecky (talk) 01:05, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Paranormal-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:39, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 *  Keep  Not the strongest claim to notability I have ever seen, but enough to satisfy the relevant guidelines. Safiel (talk) 19:52, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Change to delete I may have been feeling overly charitable the other day. Very little on Google and the sources given indicate only local notability. Safiel (talk) 04:33, 16 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - While I would love to vote keep as this seems like an interesting author, there are not enough WP:RS to support notability. She has 2 books, both of which are listed in Amazon, but nothing really talking about her or the books. The 2 source that are in the are in the article are local coverage so they would support content in the article, but not notability. Unfortunately, she falls short of WP:GNG unless there is significant coverage (which I cannot locate). --FoolMeOnce2Times (talk) 18:14, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - The two sources cited are local news stories that mention Wallace's role in a ghost hunt and the restoration of a hotel, but they don't show the in depth coverage required by WP:GNG and particularly by WP:AUTHOR. - LuckyLouie (talk) 18:02, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * One of her two books is self-published using "Bookstand Publishing", a vanity press. - LuckyLouie (talk) 17:09, 9 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete The only coverage is from a small local newspaper, does not meet WP:GNG. J04n(talk page) 21:30, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Black Kite (talk) 05:59, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L Faraone  05:06, 17 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete The book from History Press is in 4 libraries total on worldcat. this + a selfpublished book about what a local society, with references only to local papers, is not notability .  DGG ( talk ) 04:08, 19 May 2013 (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.