Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lynn Hoffman, 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 keep and move to Lynn Hoffman (author). Spellcast (talk) 14:05, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Lynn Hoffman, Author

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable author, article is advertisement like in tone, and likely autobiographical.  Citi Cat   ♫ 23:35, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Doesn't seem notable to me. Captain   panda  13:18, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment In the event this article is retained, I suggest moving the article to Lynn Hoffman (author). --User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 19:27, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletions.   —User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 19:28, 17 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,


 * Wimpy little weak keep, though the article needs fixed. He's got two novels out, one of them as a Harper audiobook and the other through a smaller but apparently well thought of press, as well as a book on wine through Prentice Hall. The article needs to be completely revamped, though, so the question is whether it's worth keeping and retooling or deleting and letting someone else do a better starting job. (Oh, and move it as suggested above.) Tony Fox (arf!) 21:36, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
 * It's not enough to pass Notability (people) though.  Citi Cat   ♫ 22:49, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
 * That's why the wimpy weak keep there. Three books from notable presses nudges up against notability to me. Tony Fox (arf!) 23:31, 22 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep since the author is likely at least somewhat notable with some reliable sources avaialble for reference. (The text claims a Booklist review, for example.) What this article really needs is a re-write and a strong dose of wikification. But that's a problem to be fixed, not a reason for deletion. - Dravecky (talk) 17:01, 23 November 2007 (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.