Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rhiannon Paille


 * 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. KTC (talk) 00:07, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Rhiannon Paille

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Doesn't meet WP:People. Her books are self-published except for one published by Coscom Entertainment, her PhD bogus if it's from "MIMT courses - Reiki Rays Institute Midwest Institute of Metaphysical Theology offer distance education for the busy adult. Our diplomas, can be completed at any time convenient to your schedule" Dougweller (talk) 19:00, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete no significant independent coverage that I could find = Not notable nonsense  ferret  20:39, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. I didn't find anything that is usable. Of the sources on the article, the first one is a link to Amazon. Selling well on Amazon isn't something that gives notability in and of itself, especially when you get into the specific areas of Amazon such as "best in Astrology on the Kindle" or things to that area. There's various reasons for this, but even if it was in the "overall best of Amazon" it still wouldn't count. The second one is a link to a blog entry for the publisher that picked one of her books up. This would make it a primary source and even if the book had been picked up by a huge publisher such as Penguin Books, a primary source still can't give notability. Besides, being published by a big house doesn't give notability automatically. That leaves two more sources. The next one is from Rue Morgue, which actually would be a RS in my book. However the final one via Scoop Sandiego wouldn't be usable for two reasons. The first is that the site isn't entirely what I'd consider to be a reliable source and the second is that even if it was, the article seems to have been written by Paille herself because her name is given where the author's would be. At very best this would be considered a primary source. Other than that the only coverage she's gotten has been in various blogs, none of which would be considered a reliable source.Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   22:07, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 01:18, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Manitoba-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 01:18, 20 January 2013 (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.