Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cate Sweeney

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. Michig (talk) 07:42, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cate Sweeney[edit]

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

Fails WP:AUTHOR. She gets a passing mention in The Guardian for her novel, but no full reviews as far as I can see. Her publisher's bio says her "plays have been produced by a number of regional companies" only. Clarityfiend (talk) 05:45, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 05:59, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 05:59, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The article talk page indicates that sources were being sought for this biography 12 years ago. Then as now nothing substantial appears to have been located. The passing mention in the DJ Taylor article about the Macmillan New Writing series is not enough to demonstrate WP:AUTHOR notability and I am not finding better. AllyD (talk) 08:16, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 11:23, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. 1 ref that doesn't appear to be relevant. No meaningful content added since the article was created in 2006, would get tanked by a new page reviewer these days. Szzuk (talk) 16:04, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There's a full review of her novel in, of all places, Chemist + Druggist, Aug. 5, 2006, p40, but I don't think that's enough to establish significant critical attention per WP:NCREATIVE. Υπογράφω (talk) 04:05, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No suggestion of notability in the article as currently worded. Deb (talk) 19:46, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete there is not even one reliable source. This would be quickly deleted if it was on a business. Our guidelines for biographies of living people are stricter than those for businesses, although they are applied less stringently.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:37, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I did find one review and added it, but there aren't any other reliable sources. May be TOOSOON. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:35, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I couldn't find any reliable sources either. Lonehexagon (talk) 04:42, 7 March 2018 (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.