Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cylin Busby

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. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 02:16, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cylin Busby (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

On the one hand, we have a BLP1E situation with her father and the shooting. On the other hand, we have her book-writing. The former does not lend itself towards inclusion on Wikipedia, and the latter is not significant enough for her to pass WP:AUTHOR. The book-selling success is (if I had to guess) largely due in part to the TV show that featured her (and probably threw in a plug or three for the book). Her other works do not appear to have drawn much attention, and thus she does not meet Wikipedia's inclusion criteria. Primefac (talk) 15:59, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. —UY Scuti ^Talk 21:04, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. —UY Scuti ^Talk 21:04, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep She does in fact pass WP:AUTHOR: "3. The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews." Because The Year We Disappeared got multiple independent periodical articles or reviews. I'll add a few to the article right now.E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:00, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• I do see Nom's point, that she is hardly a major writer. But Wikipedia is all about sources, and this author/article has sources and plenty to pass WP:AUTHOR. I added a little sourcing on her childhood. Obviously needs improvement.E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:14, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Note I just ran her and the book title into a news archive search, in 2008 The Year We Disappeared was all over the media. Lots of reviews ran in multiple papers (not echoes, independent reviews,) and there were feature stories. In plenty. @Primefac:, you may want to run the book title and/or names through a good news archive search, and consider withdrawing the nomination. E.M.Gregory (talk) 23:32, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Reluctant weak keep simply if there's enough sourcing to at least suggest a borderline keep. SwisterTwister talk 06:47, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, gggrrrr, another author who easily meets WP:GNG, article now reflects this, thanks to E.M.Gregory, a 1min search showed 3 reviews from Kirkus Reviews - [1] and 3 from Publishers Weekly - [2], that exceeds notability requirements, let alone the other references in the article. Coolabahapple (talk) 17:40, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.