Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Helen Fry


 * 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 - Thanks to and  for transforming the article hugely. (non-admin closure) – Davey 2010 •  (talk)  19:53, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Helen Fry

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I couldn't find evidence of WP:NOTABILITY Boleyn (talk) 20:19, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:12, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:12, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:12, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:12, 27 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. Very low cites on GS. Not enough sources. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:21, 27 July 2014 (UTC).
 * delete per nom. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 02:29, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment See also Articles for deletion/J. H. Schryer for the article on Helen Fry's pseudonym. Both created by a WP:SPA. Boleyn (talk) 08:27, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - Waiting for sources since 2012. For me it could be PRODed. --Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 08:40, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. A review of one of her books in the Guardian is a start, but not nearly enough. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:34, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. At least four of her books have multiple reliably-published reviews in mainstream (not just specialized academic) media, which I just added to the article. One of these is self-published but nevertheless has received significant media attention (BBC and Guardian). I think it's enough for WP:AUTHOR. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:19, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep as per David Eppstein. I added a few more references. Meets GNG. Notable historian of WW2.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 23:24, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep, David Eppstein's sources are sufficient evidence. --j⚛e deckertalk 15:12, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep, with kudos to David Eppstein and Tomwsulcer, the new sources are sufficient evidence of notability.-- Mojo Hand (talk) 15:35, 3 August 2014 (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.