Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pauline A. Chen


 * 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. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:34, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Pauline A. Chen

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

No evidence of notability (contested PROD) Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:18, 20 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. The NPR review and Plain Dealer, plus the general level of attention in non-reliable sources, was barely sufficient notability for me to see this as meeting WP:AUTHOR.  Admittedly on the bubble, and the article could use some work, but I think there is a useful stub here.  Ubelowme U  Me  20:12, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Sua sponte recusal. I created the article. I thought tagged myself because I was too heavly invested and I was asking the community to help contribute. So, it seems I used the wrong tag to request help. Live and learn. See the talk page of the article for my discussion on the reasons to keep. Geraldshields11 (talk) 12:02, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I thank everyone, including the people, who propose to delete, for taking time and attention on this article. I defer to consensus. Geraldshields11 (talk) 23:38, 22 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. Fails WP:AUTHOR and WP:BK. Qworty (talk) 01:42, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:39, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:39, 21 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. Negligible cites in GS. Reviews seem not substantial. Xxanthippe (talk) 23:05, 21 September 2012 (UTC).
 * Delete per WP:BIO1E. The Red Chamber has enough press that I think it may be (barely) notable, including the NPR and Plain Dealer reviews cited in the article and also pieces in the Daily Mail and Sunday Sun found in highbeam . But that's not enough for its notability to be inherited by its author. If an article on The Red Chamber ends up being created, it should be ok for this article's title to redirect to it. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:38, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. I can understand how an author can be notable and a book that they wrote not be notable, but the other way around just doesn't make sense to me.  The notable book couldn't exist without the author.  If there is another example in Wikipedia of a notable book whose author isn't, I'd be grateful to be pointed to it so I can try to understand this logic.  Ubelowme U  Me  22:30, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Ubelowme; Autobiography of a Geisha, although that's a very unusual case that doesn't really apply here. The Blade of the Northern Lights  ( 話して下さい ) 16:52, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
 * keep meets minimum requirements for Notability (people), a stub that can be expanded.Righteousskills (talk) 19:02, 27 September 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.