Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wendy Corsi Staub


 * 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.  Sandstein  21:42, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Wendy Corsi Staub

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:BLP of a writer, whose notability claims are referenced entirely to primary sources and blogs rather than any evidence of reliable source coverage about her in real media. For example, a literary award only constitutes a WP:AUTHOR pass if it's a major award for which media report on the award presentation as news, and not if it's a minor or local award that can be referenced only to its own self-published website about itself because media coverage about it is non-existent. There simply isn't even one reference present here at all that counts for anything whatsoever toward establishing her as notable enough. Bearcat (talk) 21:10, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 21:10, 1 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep. She is one of the most popular (top selling; widely held) suspense writers today. I was under the impression that the site of the awards would be more authoritative than mentions by third parties. I will cite reviews, bestseller rank info, etc., and see if I can find coverage of the awards. To what blog do you refer? Would it be helpful if I cited WorldCat to show library holdings? --DiamondRemley39
 * No, WorldCat wouldn't be helpful either. WorldCat is just a directory, not a publisher of editorial content. Bearcat (talk) 14:09, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Very well. To which "blogs" I referenced do you refer (and object)?--DiamondRemley39 (talk) 13:14, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 09:23, 2 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep' and it's not even close. DiamondRemley is correct that there is an abundance of reviews which satisfy NAUTHOR. For example here is a list of the Publishers Weekly reviews of her books. There are also reviews by Library Journal (accessed via subscription database) and at least one Edgar nomination. And this was all just found using Wendy Corsi Staub, I imagine there is even more coverage if we look under her other pen names. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 04:11, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you for looking into this, Barkeep49. I probably have access to LJ and other reviews through subscription databases. Should I go through and add more review citations to each work, as I did yesterday with the PW reviews? Or is it satisfactory that the reviews exist?--DiamondRemley39 (talk) 13:14, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I would hope that this is enough for to reconsider his nomination and other AfD !voters to agree to keep her article. Longterm you need to find more biographical data from reliable sources. Things like this from Guide to Literary Masters & Their Works (Salem, 2007). Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 13:35, 3 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep sources exist to establist the notability of this popular genre writer.E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:38, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep The GNG of this author is clear. See comments of Barkeep49  Lubbad85   (☎) 22:37, 3 June 2019 (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.