Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Louise Samways

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 23:16, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Louise Samways[edit]

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

fails WP:BIO and WP:AUTHOR. Limited coverage. No notable publications or major awards LibStar (talk) 12:06, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Non-notable author. The books aren't even in print any more, and the full texts are available on the author's web site, which doesn't really speak to their value. --Calton | Talk 13:07, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:20, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:20, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:20, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Non-notable author of non-notable books. SL93 (talk) 22:44, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Some of the links to sources in the article are dead. Looking around I was able to find a few places where Samways' work is briefly mentioned, but nothing in depth on her from an independent and reliable source. Note that this doesn't mean that her work does not have value, merely that we don't have enough to go on here to write a biography that meets our standards when writing about living persons. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 00:41, 19 March 2017 (UTC).[reply]
Delete - Fails WP:AUTHOR.CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 19:23, 23 March 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.