Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Philip Caveney


 * 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. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 15:28, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Philip Caveney

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Written a fair number of books, but I cannot find evidence that he meets WP:GNG much less WP:AUTHOR. Google searched turned up almost nothing aside from Amazon, GoodReads, and blogs. Primefac (talk) 15:49, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:18, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:18, 6 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Weak keep I can confirm that 1) he is published by reputable children's publishers 2) three of his books were reviewed by Booklist 3) he has been a contender (but not winner) of a book prize 4) his books can be found in a few hundred libraries in WorldCat (that's not a lot, but it's >zero). That said, children's and young adult authors don't get much recognition, so it is hard for them to achieve the kind of notability that an academic author might with just a single book. LaMona (talk) 22:05, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep this author's books are very popular, some are blue-linked here:Sebastian Darke.E.M.Gregory (talk) 02:09, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep:- Subject of the article meet WP:AUTHOR. He had created a significant or well-known work and one of his well-known work is Sebastian Darke. I also found Edinburgh book review, The Guardian, Writers Stories TV and Manchester Evening News to mention few. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 21:17, 9 June 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.