Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Renná Bruce

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 ‎ closed as article has been speedy deleted by another administrator. Bearcat (talk) 20:26, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Renná Bruce[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Semi-advertorialized article about a writer and artist, not properly sourced as passing our inclusion criteria for writers or artists. As always, neither writers nor artists are "inherently" notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia just because their work exists -- notability has to be supported by evidence that the person has received external coverage and analysis to validate their significance, such as major literary or arts awards and/or the reception of enough media coverage about them and their work to pass WP:GNG.
But there are just three footnotes here, of which two are online bookstores that are not support for notability at all, and the third comes from a minor niche publication that would be fine for use if there were better sources alongside it, but is not significant enough to singlehandedly get her over GNG all by itself if it's the only secondary source on the table.
Nothing stated here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to have considerably better sourcing than this. Bearcat (talk) 18:53, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Authors, and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 18:53, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:34, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Have added another couple of reviews. There is also this which I cannot access from UK, title being "Latest Jazlyn J book takes on green scene". PamD 07:40, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The poor sourcing of both this and Robert Mark Carpenter has led me to ask the creating editor whether they have a COI. PamD 07:52, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I had the same impression. Thanks for asking. XOR'easter (talk) 14:16, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete' I am not finding any reliable sourcing for the biographical information presented in the article. Additionally, the books are published by Jazlyn J Books, which seems to be partially owned by Renná Bruce, so essentially self-published. All signs point to the editor as starting a "career" as an editor. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 20:39, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete:my WP:AGF has expired, as the creating editor has not replied to my enquiry on their talk page about a possible COI although they have created two drafts and one new article since I posted there. The new article includes date of birth info etc which does not seem to appear in any of the sources provided. It appears that this editor probably has a COI with the subjects of their articles. PamD 07:43, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The available sourcing isn't enough to indicate that the Jazlyn J series is a "well-known body of work". Moreover, COI editing needs to be nipped in the bud. XOR'easter (talk) 21:29, 15 May 2023 (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.