Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tom Rob Smith


 * 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. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 06:33, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Tom Rob Smith

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

Delete unsourced BLP about an author just published his debut novel. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:25, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:NOTE. War  rush  21:46, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. No assertion of notability and unsourced. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:53, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  15:52, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep His book has been reviewed by The Guardian, The Times, The Independent, The Telegraph, Newsweek, USA Today ... and it's also been shortlisted for the inaugural Desmond Elliot Prize:, . Plus he's been interviewed by The Guardian, New York Magazine and Metro. There are many reliable sources covering him and his book that could easily be added to the article. -- KittyRainbow (talk) 18:54, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Kitty has clearly established notability. I wonder how the nominator and others calling for deletion managed to miss those sources during their research? Phil Bridger (talk) 11:56, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete this article is totally useless as it stands -- totally unsourced. If you source the facts I would have said weak keep lacking the mention of notability. As it sits it fails to meet criteria for notability or for a stub. And, presumably he is living so it violates WP:BIO. EvanCarroll (talk) 05:37, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, Clearly there are reliable sources on this author, the quality of the article should have no bearing on a discussion of the notability of the author. WP:DEL clearly states: If the page can be improved, this should be solved through regular editing, rather than deletion.--Captain-tucker (talk) 17:47, 20 June 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.