Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sophie conran


 * 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 per WP:HEY. Both delete preferences ("spam" and "sources do not appear in articles") discounted as irrelevant to the deletion discussion per WP:PROBLEMS. There is unanimity amongst the remainder of respondents that coverage of the topic in reliable sources is sufficient for the Heymann Standard. Non-admin closure by Skomorokh  01:28, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Sophie conran

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

I removed a speedy from this page as the article does assert notability. However I'm not sure if she is notable enough to warrent an article Theresa Knott | The otter sank 10:28, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm over the moon she collaberated with her brother. The only potentially notable bit is having written ( well, possibly written ) a cookbook, with a nice advert for that.  The rest of it is a MySpace CV... with notability assumed to have passed from parental DNA. Given it was created by someone purported to be the subject, it's nothing more than an advert/blog/resume... Minkythecat (talk) 10:40, 15 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. Spam. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 10:49, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep, although the article requires a substantial re-write and there is a apparent conflict of interest. However, she has been published and awarded, and a search on Google gives a lot of relevant results. - TexMurphy (talk) 10:50, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  00:14, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Google News finds enough coverage in reliable sources for notability including . Phil Bridger (talk) 10:48, 19 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep Go to Google Books, go to Google News & Archive, go to Google, try different keywords, and when sources are not online go to your local fucking library and read them. Make it work, because authors don't need people kicking them around after all the hard hours they have spent getting their words just right. Sincerely, Manhattan Samurai (talk) 20:46, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete sources do not appear in article, no assertion of notability. You said it Dad (talk) 05:00, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Just because the sources do not appear in the article does not mean the article should be deleted. If sources exist then the article should be kept and fixed through regular editing as it clearly states in WP:DEL If the page can be improved, this should be solved through regular editing, rather than deletion.--Captain-tucker (talk) 14:44, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep, There are many reliable sources available for this person, I just added Eleven (11) citations to this article. There may be some POV'ish words that should be removed but this person is clearly notable.  --Captain-tucker (talk) 14:46, 23 July 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.