Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maggie Power


 * 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 the author article and delete the three book articles.. The author article needs development but it appears to have sources demonstrating notability. Material on the books can be added to that. Bduke   (Discussion)  12:07, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Maggie Power

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

Non-notable novelist and her books Tikiwont (talk) 09:20, 16 September 2008 (UTC)


 * delete all Nothing in any of these stubs asserting notability, and virtually no substantive content. Just adverts really. jimfbleak (talk) 09:57, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - no notability for the author (one blog entry I did find indicated she was now self publishing and hadn't received any mainstream reviews), none of the books seem to pass WP:BK. CultureDrone (talk) 10:53, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Maggie, delete books I think that Maggies everywhere, of any race, creed or ethnic origin, should be empowered. That being said, I think that having two novels published by Simon & Schuster would be notable.  Any information about the two novels could be incorporated into the author article, and I agree that stubs for those don't need to be reserved if all they have is an ISBN number.  Mandsford (talk) 16:32, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak keep for the author Porphyria's Lover. at any rate had a review in TLS, the Times literary supplement. no. 4827, (1995): 28 according to WorldCat. . And S&S is no vanity press. Very few US holdings of it or the other titles, tho. 1 article is enough, but the content needs to be expanded. DGG' (talk) 02:33, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  23:28, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  23:28, 18 September 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.