Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Victoria LePage


 * 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. Yunshui 雲 水 10:36, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Victoria LePage

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:AUTHOR. It took a collaboration of editors a while to sift through what could be verified and what couldn't as the article before the investigation sat as a hallmark WP:SOAP, but it has become clear to me that outside of the WP:FRINGE communities, this person is not well-known. To that end, she also fails WP:FRINGEBLP since there does not seem to be notice of her writings by those not taken in by the New Age flights-of-fancy she entertains. jps (talk) 18:33, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete This is mostly "referenced" to her own website (which no longer exists, although an older one still does) and it fails to make much of a claim of notability anyway. One of her books ("Mysteries of the Bridechamber: The Initiation of Jesus and the Temple of Solomon") is published through Simon and Schuster, which is at least a mainstream publisher, but the other ("Shambhala: The Fascinating Truth behind the Myth of Shangri-la") is through Quest Books which seems to be something to do with the Theosophical Society or maybe just not a notable publisher at all. Discounting the second and focusing on the first: Does it get any Google News or Scholar coverage? A professional review? Anything RS at all? Um, no. In fact I don't see anything to suggest that she is very widely known of even within the fringe interest circles that these sorts of books are aimed at, which is even less than what the nomination credits her with.--DanielRigal (talk) 20:34, 9 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. DanielRigal (talk) 20:42, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Spirituality-related deletion discussions. DanielRigal (talk) 20:42, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Paranormal-related deletion discussions. DanielRigal (talk) 20:42, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 04:56, 10 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete. Mysteries has low double-digit holdings, but WorldCat shows nothing for Shambhala. Article is an unreferenced CV, ORPHAN, etc. Can't find anything substantial in GNews. GS shows total citations in low double-digits. Uncontroversial delete. Agricola44 (talk) 22:29, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. Really can't find any independent coverage of significance whatsoever. Kb.au (talk) 23:31, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete No evidence of notability. Not finding coverage. MrBill3 (talk) 03:51, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:19, 13 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment, hi, you were unable to find library holdings for Shambhala? here it is: around 80 libraries it was also reviewed by Nexus (magazine) but haven't found anything else. Coolabahapple (talk) 08:33, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Correct. The resource I use to interface to WorldCat either did not show that (not likely), or I just missed it (much more likely). It is obviously in the database, as you've shown. Thanks. At only double-digit holdings, it's consistent with the rest of the picture of this person's notability, as discussed above. Many thanks for the correction! Agricola44 (talk) 15:38, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
 * i agree, thanks. Coolabahapple (talk) 04:16, 14 January 2018 (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.