Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michele weiner davis


 * 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. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 17:13, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Michele weiner davis

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

I don't believe this person meets WP:N. Of the five references listed, two are to her website, one is to a book discussing her work but not her life, and the other two are self-published sources (website of a conference she spoke at) and note that she won an award. There is no independent, non-trivial coverage of her life. Until that exists, the article should not. (I declined the speedy deletion for this, which is why I am listing it here.) Karanacs (talk) 15:02, 23 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete as nominator. Karanacs (talk) 15:02, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - Very spammy, no assertion of notability (a quick search reveals none either). — neuro  (talk)  16:16, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. No coverage, no notability. Drmies (talk) 20:56, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - does not meet WP:PROF. Bearian (talk) 18:41, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - 441 hits on google news (!) weighs in favor of notability; multiple books published some of which appear to have been popular; a Best-selling author per Time Magazine, tons of stuff beyond the trivial, e.g., CNN appearance in 2003 about one of her books ; not clear that any of the delete !votes have throughly examined subject; also, it appears that article was edited since last delete !vote to reflect awards won by subject. I would propose relisting to gather further input before closing. --Milowent (talk) 20:14, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I did see some of those, and while I believe they may establish notability for one or more of her books, there does not appear to be significant coverage of the author herself. Karanacs (talk) 21:05, 30 September 2009 (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.