Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shannan Rouss


 * 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. Scott Mac (Doc) 22:52, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Shannan Rouss

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Declined speedy and contested prod. Fails WP:Notability. No reliable WP:SOURCES, the current ones either being from the publisher or the subject's own website. GregJackP (talk) 14:39, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:16, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

If this person is not notable then I gladly support deletion. In my opinion she is notable, although she is my sister. I have added a review of her book from Elle magazine and will add one from people when it is available online. It is in the 4/12/10 issue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JordanWilliamR (talk • contribs) 18:30, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This article has been nominated for rescue. Silver  seren C 22:03, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:24, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment I have tagged this article for rescue. I have also added some sources. I believe there are other, more comprehensive sources to be found out there. Silver  seren C 22:03, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Keep, author with book out from major publisher, article now has adequate sources. NawlinWiki (talk) 03:35, 13 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete. What adequate sources? References 1 and 3 are identical links to the mini-biography by the book's publisher that was clearly copied from ref.2—the subject's website. 4 is the book's summary written by the publisher. 5 has two sentences on the book and no coverage of the subject whatsoever. External Links 2-6 don't contain nontrivial independent coverage of the subject. External links 3 and 4 are irrelevant articles written by the subject. The video on MSN.com/YouTube is a promotional book preview made by the book's publisher. The book review (1) looks ok, but it only discusses the book, not the book's author. The subject doesn't seem to pass WP:AUTHOR or WP:BIO in general. — Rankiri (talk) 15:21, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete for now. Authors become notable by publishing notable books--that's the relevant part of their lives. The question is whether this book is notable enough yet. I don;t think it is -- WorldCat shows only 38 libraries with copies. But it has just been published, so no reason not to try again if there is major critical notice. There's a mention of her in library Journal but no review yet. Trying to have an article on a first book by an author the moment it's published tends to seem promotional. DGG ( talk ) 04:07, 14 April 2010 (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.