Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Victoria Brown (author)


 * 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:40, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Victoria Brown (author)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Doesn't seem to have received enough coverage to pass WP:GNG. All of the potential sources I could find were press releases/statements from the subject's own site about her own book or about her own work. Stalwart 111  05:50, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I also strongly suspect there is some paid editing involved here given the obvious (to me anyway) links between the creator and subject. Stalwart 111  05:53, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete I tagged this a few weeks ago and, despite many edits by the original contributor, including reduction of the promotional tone, the main notability concerns remain. The article tells much on the subject's upbringing and family background (unreferenced) but that is not evidence of notability. In terms of WP:AUTHOR, the subject's book is published through ASA Publishing Company whose website offers various publishing packages, and I am not finding evidence of attained notability. AllyD (talk) 06:27, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. Ignoring the promotional tone of the article, there just isn't enough notability to warrant keeping this page. There are plenty of primary sources, but nothing that would show notability. I would like to also throw in my suspicion that this is paid editing. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   08:29, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:59, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:59, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:01, 16 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete per all of the above. Logical Cowboy (talk) 01:05, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. Doesn't meet any notability requirements; no RSes. Reads like a vanity piece. Softlavender (talk) 06:12, 17 July 2013 (UTC)


 * NOTICE: The link to this AfD discussion is not showing up on the article's page. It's only fair that it should. Can someone fix that? Softlavender (talk) 23:04, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * It's there and it's working for me. Did you click on the link itself? There's nothing in the history to suggest it was removed. Stalwart 111  23:17, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Well that's bloody weird. It works, but it's red. Why is it a redlink if it works? Softlavender (talk) 04:13, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Not sure mate. Cache or cookies issue maybe? Stalwart 111  04:43, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Can you check and see if the link is red for you? I've cleared my cache a few times, but the link is red even though it is active. Softlavender (talk) 00:22, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Never mind; I fixed it by editing the page -- something about a line-break or extra space, which I removed. It doesn't show up as an edit in the History but what I did makes the link blue now. Weird. Alternate universe stuff. Softlavender (talk) 00:27, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Spooky stuff - glad you got it sorted out though! I still have no idea what that could have been about. Maybe the fact that I used WP:Twinkle to do the nomination? Stalwart 111  01:27, 19 July 2013 (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.