Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robin Maxwell (author)


 * 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) Superflewis (talk) 00:30, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Robin Maxwell (author)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Basically spam. She may be sufficiently well-known to merit an article but nothing in this unreferenced puff-piece is worth salvaging. Some parts come pretty close to a copyright violation of the autobio on her website. Pascal.Tesson (talk) 21:27, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Another crappy article from a Wikipedia sourcing perspective, though we have various tags that are supposed to be used to request them. The argument that the puffery in the article cannot be removed without leaving anything worth salvaging also doesn't fly. Maxwell has written several books that appear to have received critical attention and has had works produced for television, all of which are credible claims of notability. Per Deletion policy, nominators are required to consider editing, improving or mergeing articles before pushing for deletion, yet there appears to be no evidence of these efforts. This is yet another article that should be cleaned up and improved, not deleted. Alansohn (talk) 23:28, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep I've pared the article down to a stub. Zagalejo^^^ 23:48, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Very Weak Keep I'm not finding anything that has significant coverage of her (at least what I can read for free). There appears to have been the claim of awards in the old article but, having trouble verifying. I agree with talk on this one. Make an effort to fix it but, if that does in fact proves impossible or people that can get to the pay-per-view sources determine they aren't adequate for notability and verifiability than revisit deletion. Jasynnash2 (talk) 09:18, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  00:14, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep - I just added thirteen (13) reliable source reviews of this authors books to the article. --Captain-tucker (talk) 01:28, 18 September 2008 (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.