Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Katherine Beck

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. Woohookitty 08:42, 16 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Katherine Beck

"doesn't seem very notable" Ben-w 00:29, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. She writes for the New Yorker. Zoe 00:31, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
Delete, writing for a paper doesn't do it for me, and her academic role is an adjunct teaching position so she probably fails WP:PROF. -Splash 00:37, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- The New Yorker is a national literary magazine, well-known for years. It's a major publication. Zoe 01:04, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
Delete - It is not verifiable she contributes regularly to The New Yorker[1][2]. In a Google test the only notable author found is K. K. Beck aka "Katherine Kristine Beck Marris"[3] who is an unrelated author, sometimes just called "Katherine Beck", who ~~deserves~~ has an article. Another "Katherine Beck" who is probably a different person, is a non-notable photographer and and writer for the student paper Daily Trojan in Southern California. --rob 21:35, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
This nom never seems to have been added to a main page, at least not that I can see. Adding now. Keep. JYolkowski // talk 20:53, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Notable enough. Delete -- appears to be alternately unverifiable and false in all respects. Good research guys. Sdedeo 21:12, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per Splash.Roodog2k (talk) 22:57, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This article namedrops some famous people, but the subject isn't quite notable enough yet. Gamaliel 23:18, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
WP:Bio specifies that we may include biographies of "Published authors, editors, and photographers who have written books with an audience of 5,000 or more or in periodicals with a circulation of 5,000 or more." Ms Beck appears to meet this criteria so this article should be kept. However, given that there is another Katherine Beck who meets the same criteria, this article should be moved to Katherine Beck (poet) and a disambiguation article created in this space referring to her and to the novellist. I therefore vote to Keep, move and disambiguate. Delete as per user Rob until her existence is verified.

Capitalistroadster 01:17, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I now beleive this article is a complete fake. Please see Talk:Katherine Beck. --rob 23:38, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Concur with Rob, delete unless verified. Pilatus 13:46, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Good work nosing this one out. FWIW, I read the NY and cannot ever recall haveing seen her name. Delete per rob.Dottore So 22:24, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thivierr is being an asshole, therefore I am changing my vote back to keep. Yes, I know, WP:POINT. So shoot me. Zoe 04:23, September 11, 2005 (UTC)
- Reply: Nobody should take comments about their edits personally. Insults and personal attacks are not appropriate. --rob 06:36, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  - Then I suggest you withdraw your attack on me on the page indicated. Zoe 07:05, September 11, 2005 (UTC)
    - You're confusing honest criticism of voting with a personal attack. You've voted here based on something wholely unrelated to the article, which you know is wrong. You even cited the guideline that says your action is wrong. If you choose to leave your personal insult against me, then it won't be my reputation that is the one truly harmed. --rob 07:18, 11 September 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.