Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Claire Fitzpatrick

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. czar 21:27, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Claire Fitzpatrick[edit]

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

Promotional article, subject does not appear to meet WP:NAUTHOR - works are self-published, award nominations do not seem to be notable Melcous (talk) 03:04, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:19, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:19, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:19, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:19, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:19, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

delete fails GNG. Dlohcierekim (talk) 08:15, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, v/r - T P 13:31, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Very far from being notable. She has written for Aurealis and self-published a novel, but has not received critical attention. Her webpage has a list of reviews[1] none of which are from obviously reliable sources. Google shows nothing in the way of reviews. (Probably owing to the size of the Australian SF scene it would be hard for her to get reviewed in a publication she does not have some kind of a link with, but even allowing for that, she doesn't meet WP:GNG or WP:NAUTHOR.) --Colapeninsula (talk) 15:23, 23 June 2017 (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.