Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mayra Calvani


 * 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 --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 07:29, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Mayra Calvani

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable writer. It's hard to find independent third-part references about her. damiens.rf 18:16, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. &mdash;  Rhododendrites  talk  \\ 19:07, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Puerto Rico-related deletion discussions. &mdash;  Rhododendrites  talk  \\ 19:08, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. &mdash;  Rhododendrites  talk  \\ 19:08, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Belgium-related deletion discussions. &mdash;  Rhododendrites  talk  \\ 19:09, 17 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep - Well known Puerto Rican author. I wonder why the nominator has been recently dedicated to the deletion nominations of Puerto Rican related article? It has to be a coincidence. Tony the Marine (talk) 23:30, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - if she is well known, I can't find it. A google search finds non-authoritative blogs (including the subject's own), Amazon book-selling sites and the like.  I have not finding any reliable sources that indicate notability, much less that she meets WP:AUTHOR criteria.--Rpclod (talk) 02:29, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - Tried quite a few search terms in English and Spanish, but I can't come up with anything that would help with notability. The Spanish entry has a longer ref list, but like this entry, the references are either self-published or insignificant mentions. EricEnfermero (Talk) 03:27, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. I did a search for her name without quotation marks and found nothing that would really help show that she meets notability guidelines. At best I found this interview through BlogCritics, which isn't the strongest of sources on its best days. (They have editorial oversight, but it's still sort of unverified.) I can find nothing to suggest that she's a well-known author and while self-publishing does not automatically mean that someone will not pass notability guidelines (Hugh Howey is an example of someone who can become notable), it is extremely difficult for people to pass. (Amber Quill looks to be a publishing company, but from what I can see now her work is self-published.) Simply publishing, be it through a publisher or via other avenues, does not give the automatic notability it once did years ago. The sources in the article are entirely unusable, as they're primary at best - and merchant sources should not be on Wikipedia in any format, so I'm removing the Amazon link. I also don't really see where this nomination was the result of any bias or agenda, if that's what Tony is implying. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  05:18, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete for reasons cited above. Search did not pull notable references.Notypos (talk) 21:18, 18 July 2015 (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.