Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Terrie Williams


 * 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. Mojo Hand (talk) 15:04, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Terrie Williams

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

It is possible that she may be a notable author, but this is so totally an advertisement that it would be better to start over. The awards are trivial, and the refs are mainly routine announcements of them--and her own PR. This was accepted at afc -- if afc accepts this sort of material, I'm not sure it's a net plus to WP.  DGG ( talk ) 22:28, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:07, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:07, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:07, 15 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep-You're totally right. It is written like an advertisement, and it was my fault for accepting it but I believe it could be fixed. TheQ Editor     (Talk) 19:06, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. If they are notable, someone can write a new article, but it would have to be fundamentally rewritten, so nothing is lost by the deletion.  Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124;  WER  00:43, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep per AUTHOR book reviews: Publishers Weekly, Kirkus, Multicultural Review, Black Issues, Library Journal, Book Report, Ebony, Booklist, New York Amsterdam News, People. -- Green  C  03:20, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep coverage in USB/HE Professional, PBS, Playbill, NewsOne. AfD is not cleanup and any puffery or slanted POV can be fixed by regular editing, though to be honest I was expecting something loaded with far more superlatives than I can see at the moment. AfC has to pass any article that the reviewer doesn't believe meets the deletion criteria, irrespective of the opinions of editors on the topic. Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   19:24, 20 June 2014 (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.