Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Donna Kossy

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 no consensus. Sandstein 08:20, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Donna Kossy[edit]

Non-notable book author. Only a primary source is used for the article. She wrote two books worldcat.org, both of which seem to fail WP:BK. I couldn't find a biography of her in a third party source. Pcap ping 08:22, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. -- Pcap ping 08:22, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- Pcap ping 08:22, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not notable enough. TopGearFreak ^Talk 13:57, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Insufficient notability to meet WP:CREATIVE. ^LeaveSleaves _talk 18:56, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The link provided by LeaveSleaves show reviews by the New Scientist and the Los Angeles Times. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:45, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 18:53, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Reviews in major sources are enough for notability. Besides the two mentioned by Phil, there are reviews of various publications of hers in the chicago sun-Times, Dallas Morning News. On Google Scholar I find her cited as a popular expert in "Political paranoia v. political realism: on distinguishing between bogus conspiracy theories and genuine conspiratorial politics" by Jeffrey M. Bale Patterns of Prejudice, Volume 41, Issue 1 February 2007 , pages 45 - 60 On the basis of the material in all these, the article can be expanded--she seems to be regarded as an expert of UFO mythology. DGG (talk) 19:30, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - author of a book or two that do not pass the WP:BK guidelines (despite two reviews in notable publications). Does not meet WP:CREATIVE either, due to lack of reliable sources on the person. Not even close to passing WP:ACADEMIC...--Boffob (talk) 20:41, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. From WP:CREATIVE: "The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, which has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews." How do the reviews referenced above not get the subject through this guideline? Phil Bridger (talk) 21:16, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Notable author of notable book. ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:34, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep In addition to the above sources, and keeping with WP:CREATIVE (particularly being covered by reviews) I found a few further sources. An interview with Zines, a review by Colin Bennett, and a brief mention on Wake Up Down There!. I also found this which mentions the author a few times, but it could possibly be someone else and isn't particularly about the writing. Regardless I believe they've been covered enough by reliable sources and reviews to meet WP:Creative and be notable. --Banime (talk) 22:03, 28 November 2008 (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.

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 03:25, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(This stub is now entirely rewritten and sourced as a C-class article.) — The Little Blue Frog (ribbit) 20:34, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]