Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Karla Turner


 * 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. Courcelles 00:34, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Karla Turner

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Fails WP:BIO and WP:PROF. jps (talk) 16:44, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Article violates the neutral point of view and lacks reliable sources. Though Google News shows a number of mentions of this person, most seem to be brief descriptions of speeches she gave.  Books by and about her are by fringe publishers. Cullen328 (talk) 18:43, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
 * This person has books written about her? Which books? Uncle G (talk) 13:10, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Not entirely about her, but for example, a chapter of Wake Up Down There by Greg Bishop is an interview with her. She is mentioned in several other pro-UFO books also, per Google Books .Cullen328 (talk) 16:28, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Mentioned to what depth? Uncle G (talk) 14:59, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Hard to judge the depth because Google Books doesn't let readers go very deep. Most appear to be unreliable UFO cult books.  One possibility is The lure of the edge: scientific passions, religious beliefs and the pursuit if UFOs, by Brenda Densler, University of Califirnia Press, 2003.  Impossible to see how detailed the coverage is. Cullen328 (talk) 22:27, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Paranormal-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:44, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:44, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete: lack of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". The small number of news reports do not "address the subject directly in detail" & the books appear to either (i) also fail to "address the subject directly in detail" (ii) lack reliability and/or (iii) lack independence. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 08:02, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete No reliable independent sources in the article, and none found via google search. LK (talk) 07:49, 31 December 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.