Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jim Wallace (author)


 * 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. Mkativerata (talk) 18:47, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Jim Wallace (author)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Fails WP:BIO. No third-party independent sources establish his notability except for his WorldCat Identity which does not do the trick. ScienceApologist (talk) 14:16, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - Finding no third-party sources. The sources cited on the page are pretty useless too. The reviewer that is cited seems like a hobbyist. — GorillaWarfare talk-review me! 14:28, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:07, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete- Mostly for lack of independent sources, although its not common for lesser known authors to have articles. Better independent citations would change my vote.--Jojhutton (talk) 22:56, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete the article pretty much makes the case for his not being notable. sources not found to support notability. This series is obviously notable, but the individual books did not get independent reviews as far as i know, and i would only consider authors of them notable if they went on to do other works, or were already notable when these came out.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 03:19, 5 August 2010 (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.