This discussion was subject to a
deletion review on 2012 January 9. For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. |
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talk about my edits? 13:52, 9 January 2012 (UTC) reply
Lacks reliable independent sources to establish notability as required by WP:GNG. It's unlikely but possible the subjects books may be notable but notability is not WP:INHERITED. Subject certainly doesn't meet the hurdle for presumed notability under WP:AUTHOR. Msnicki ( talk) 23:22, 26 December 2011 (UTC) reply
*Delete The subject does not seem to have sufficient notability. I agree that the interview is a primary source, and would make a good back-up reference for the article, but is not enough to establish notability. The WaPo article is, indeed, better at establishing notability of the cookbook or the recipe than the author, as the article's coverage of the author is trivial at best. Finally, the editor who started the article (and to date is the main contributor) is the owner of a Public Relations company, who has the article subject as a client (see
[3], articles listed under "Sheknows"), so I am (perhaps unfairly) putting this under an even higher-power
WP:N microscope than usual. The end result is that it doesn't measure up.
Livit⇑
Eh?/
What? 03:01, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
reply
{{
cite web}}
: External link in |publisher=
(
help){{
cite web}}
: External link in |publisher=
(
help){{
cite web}}
: External link in |publisher=
(
help){{
cite web}}
: External link in |publisher=
(
help){{
cite web}}
: External link in |publisher=
(
help)