Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Starshine Roshell

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. Clear consensus not to have a separate article, but proposed merge target seems to already have sufficient coverage without merging material from here. Fritzpoll (talk) 08:50, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Starshine Roshell[edit]

Clear COI-violating BLP fails WP:AUTHOR -- only source given mentions this person in a passing way (mentioned she wore an evening gown at a union function in a gossip column that quickly moved onto other things). Keep Your Skirt On is only in three libraries as far as I can tell from WorldCat, failing standalone book notability guidelines. Real-Life Royalty is in some libraries, but certainly not an important body of work to give author a Wikipedia article, etc. per our standards. Slight argument to be made that the latter book might barely meet standards for an article on its own -- it at least meets some of the initial criteria instead of immediately failing, like the former book, but it looks like it'd be an uphill battle for even that. DreamGuy (talk) 18:23, 25 May 2009 (UTC) DreamGuy (talk) 18:23, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete She seems moderately prolific as an author and columnist, but I don't see any evidence of her works being cited, receiving any major notice, commentary. I would be convinced to keep if someone could turn up reliable, independent sources written about her, as opposed to written by her. I've been unable to find that. The only blurbs written about her that I find are in the context of promoting or introducing her column or books, and are thus not independent. Cazort (talk) 22:14, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:03, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep Multiple books, at least one in a number of libraries, seems to squeak by...COI is not relevant, just tacky - Vartanza (talk) 05:28, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete Fails notability, books fail notability —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rotovia (talk • contribs) 00:14, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 03:16, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge & redirect to Santa Barbara News-Press controversy, not notable but significant in that context, metnioned a couple of times in that article. Drawn Some (talk) 04:00, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. per nom. Niteshift36 (talk) 05:33, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Relevant info already in Santa Barbara News-Press controversy. لenna vecia 15:46, 2 June 2009 (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.