Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lilith Saintcrow

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 keep. (non-admin closure) — Sam Sailor 23:55, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lilith Saintcrow[edit]

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

Prolific author about whom little seems to be known other than book titles. A Google news search turned up on a single review of one of her books. Perhaps someone can find reliable sources that demonstrate notability, but I could not. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 15:07, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Ran a news archive search; added a couple of sources to the article, there were more available. She's not Agatha Christie, but her books do get some press attention.E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:39, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Two mentions in the local newspaper and another in the Whitehorse Star don't amount to being notable as an author. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 23:12, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No, but as I said, there were more articles in that search. To be fair, I have the convenience of being able to run Proquest News Archive searches. Searches, however, even powerful archive searches, only discover some sources, never all sources. when I find some, I assume that there are likely to be more, with more diligent searching.E.M.Gregory (talk) 00:15, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the Whitehorse Star is not "local" to Vancourver. Also, a search reveals that both articles cited to The Columbian were picked up by the McClatchy - Tribune Business News wire service.E.M.Gregory (talk) 00:15, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Added a brief review from The Guardian.E.M.Gregory (talk) 00:15, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Just checked her nome de plume, Lili St. Crow. More reviews there.E.M.Gregory (talk) 00:15, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Also Nom can find more reviews by clicking "Highbeam" on the tool bar.E.M.Gregory (talk) 00:18, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks E.M.Gregory, that's very helpful. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 16:01, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Whoops, forgot to mention that the reason why this one seemed worth searching is that the books come out from major publishers - who are not known for continuing to publish authors of genre fiction whose books fail to sell significant numbers. So many writers found at AFD are self-promoting. This one is genuinely popular.E.M.Gregory (talk) 00:20, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep If you search for her name and include prominent reviewers in the search, you'll find plenty of attention from Kirkus and Publisher's Weekly. I'd start adding the references, but won't have time tonight. (As an anecdote, her books are very popular in my library.) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 01:15, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep per WP:BARE. She appears to be be notable enough. Bearian (talk) 20:06, 10 January 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.