Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeff T. Kane


 * 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. Rjd0060 (talk) 18:39, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Jeff T. Kane

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

This author appears to fail WP:N - minimal Google results don't include anything resembling decent reliable sources, and claims of publishing appear to be mostly on small, non-notable sites. One book sold through Amazon, published on Lulu.com. I don't see anything that affirms any notability here. Delete Tony Fox (arf!) 16:49, 17 April 2008 (UTC) Tony Fox (arf!) 16:49, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.   -- Fabrictramp (talk) 17:13, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete - Sources provided are dubious and one of them is just an Amazon listing. Any self-publisher can sell their books on Amazon. Writer is not notable and the article was created by a vandal. Nobody of Consequence (talk) 17:24, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete - He fails note. No google news hit for any date, minimal google hits. He looks to be in the same realm of aspiring authors as thousands upon thousands. lulu is self-publishing, so this wouldn't prove any notability. Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 17:26, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete Self publisher, fails WP:N.  D u s t i speak and be heard! 19:08, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom - non notable Dreamspy (talk) 20:39, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete. Lulu is a notorious vanity press that confers notability on nobody. StorySouth is a notorious online-only "journal" that confers notability on nobody.  He completely fails WP:BK.  Also, this guy is constantly removing tags from his article--a very aggressive vanity-press vandal who's already been blocked  but continues to vandalize articles through his ISP.  Get rid of this thing and salt it if it's recreated. Qworty (talk) 18:01, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. He does not have anything available on Lulu at the moment and has been published otherwise by many other non-vanity presses. His stories have appeared in print and online in many journals and Ruthie's Club is a notable paying erotica site. He also was a finalist in Story South's notable online stories of 2004. I'm not sure how that doesn't satisfy a third party source since it was neither a site that published him or had anything to do with him personally. He also just had a story appear in the new issue of Demon Minds which is a paying horror magazine. Whether or not the author has vadalized the site should have nothing to do with their notability as an author or the article about them. --24.185.244.21 (talk) 22:07, 21 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Has he been written up in other reliable sources? A couple of sales does not confer notability. Tony Fox (arf!) 02:34, 22 April 2008 (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.