Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert Fabbri (novelist)

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. Apparent consensus DGG ( talk ) 21:56, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Fabbri (novelist)[edit]

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

I had (obviously incorrectly) speedied this a year and a half ago when it was a new article, the speedy was declined and it stayed there, until recent edits popped it in my watchlist again.

The obvious concern is notability, in particular WP:AUTHOR. the only book review I found was [1], which I think falls under "passing mention". Maybe writing for children/young adults explains the lack of "real" review in the press, but well, we need some source. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 15:33, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:29, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:29, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Switzerland-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:29, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - many young adult fiction books get reviewed, so if this hasn't been then it's possibly because this is not a notable author. Bearian (talk) 21:06, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, st170e^talk 01:06, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Despite being described as a "best-selling" author, no established notability through WP:GNG or WP:NAUTHOR. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 21:30, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as it's clear none of this amounts to substance and he's not notable as an author with followed significance. SwisterTwister talk 21:43, 26 December 2016 (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.