Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Selena Kitt (2nd nomination)


 * 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.  Sandstein  04:54, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Selena Kitt
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Under general WP:NOTABILITY. Non-notable author self-promotional material with nothing but self-references; no notability from third-party sources established on several Google searches, other than as a prolific writer of print-on-demand pornography (and as a winner of awards for such from self-published internet sites: no professional recognition). No independently-published books nor any recognized ones. Possible notability: has a modicum of some sort of fame from being listed on Wikipedia ( using another SPS in a tangential mention in an Ars Technica article) as an author who had her books deleted from the Amazon Kindle due to depictions of incest. Edit: this should have been CSD'd under "recreation of deleted material", but I just saw a previous AfD and assumed, "no, CSD is out of the question."St John Chrysostom ΔόξατωΘεώ 22:50, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom - non-notable author of self-published works without their own notability. John Carter (talk) 00:53, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Weak keep (for now) I'm at work, so it's hard to search for information on this author without pulling up some NSFW pics. However, based on what I saw, this woman appears to be one of the few self-published authors who has actually sold a ton of books. I could be getting misled by promotional material, based on my cursory search. But, perhaps someone can do a bit of googling from a personal PC and determine if there's any substance to this.JoelWhy (talk) 12:44, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:54, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Please do so - we come across these every once in a while, where the "wheat and the tares" can not be separated, and that the internet is so flooded with self-promotional crap (just as this article was before I stubbed it) that it's a very tiring task to attempt to sort through it all. And, even if she has sold "a ton of books" (what's a ton?), there are no reliable sources (see WP:IRS) with which to establish notability (at least in the first five to ten pages of a few different Google searches). St John Chrysostom ΔόξατωΘεώ 20:38, 26 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete The notability of having her writings removed from the Kindle service warrants notation on the Kindle article, but not her own. Regardless of how many books she's sold, many more noteworthy self-published writers lack Wiki articles simply because independent success doesn't necessarily make one notable. --(user BigDumbWeirdo, not loged in) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.154.235.100 (talk) 16:35, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete as lacking indepedent sources, unless the EPIC Awards here are the same ones as at The White House Project (and I don't think they are), in which case Keep. Stuartyeates (talk) 08:16, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete not notable. Marikafragen (talk) 00:01, 3 May 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.