Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael siemsen


 * 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. Black Kite (talk) 16:31, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Michael siemsen

 * – ( View AfD View log )

I cannot find significant coverage of this author in multiple reliable sources per WP:AUTHOR. Search for results in mainly booksellers and blog reviews. Contested prod. ... disco spinster   talk  20:13, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:04, 2 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talk about my edits? 17:19, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 00:29, 17 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. I did a search and found nothing to show that this self-published author has any notability per Wikipedia guidelines. (Author's only book was published through CreateSpace.) I wish him well in his career and hope that one day he can get the notability to pass WP:AUTHOR, but there's nothing out there to show that he passes it at this time.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 05:21, 17 February 2012 (UTC)tokyogirl79
 * Additional. If all else fails, this could probably be speedied via A7, to be honest. There's absolutely no notability here and the author didn't sell that well to where he'd be considered exceptional as far as self-published sales go.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 05:27, 17 February 2012 (UTC)tokyogirl79

"*Additional additional. I also wanted to address the PROD comments that the book is a bestseller. According to the author's page, it was a top 100 Kindle bestseller. Unfortunately achieving bestseller status in any format (whether it's on Amazon or NYT lists) does not in itself give you notability. You must have secondary and independent reliable sources to show that the book achieved notability. (And even then it'd be notability for the book and not for the author.) Blogs do not count unless it's by someone who is considered to be an absolute authority, which 99.9% of book review blogs do not have.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 08:17, 17 February 2012 (UTC)Tokyogirl79
 * Comment. I had a feeling that the person who created the article was either the author himself or someone who knew him and I've managed to confirm it via this website: . I've tagged the article accordingly.I'd advise the author to be careful since it's highly discouraged to create your own article since it can and often is seen by others as a promotional move. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 08:21, 17 February 2012 (UTC)tokyogirl79
 * Delete - as already said, WP:AUTHOR is not met. I can't find anything written about the author in reliable sources. SmartSE (talk) 10:53, 17 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - fails WP:AUTHOR. ukexpat (talk) 14:23, 17 February 2012 (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.