Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Terri Reid

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. MBisanz ^talk 00:12, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Terri Reid[edit]

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

A self-published author of mystery novels. She sells only thru Amazon. No independent, reliable references about her except one that I found from her hometown paper. Prod was contested on the removal of the promotional Amazon links and her sales rank on Amazon. Bgwhite (talk) 17:32, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Bgwhite (talk) 17:33, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: (Not sure I know the voting format...) It didn't occur to me to save a screenshot of when the first book, Loose Ends, reached #1. However, here are rankings today of the first and last books in the series, which ought to make it clear that she sells a significant number of copies. These are Amazon-generated rankings, not author supplied rankings, taken from the book pages whose urls I have noted with them.

http://www.amazon.com/Loose-Ends-OReilly-Paranormal-ebook/dp/B003Y5H8IK

Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,695 Paid in Kindle Store

   * #7 in Kindle Store > Kindle eBooks > Fiction > Genre Fiction > Horror > Ghosts
   * #7 in Books > Literature & Fiction > Genre Fiction > Horror > Occult
   * #7 in Kindle Store > Kindle eBooks > Fiction > Genre Fiction > Horror > Occult

http://www.amazon.com/Broken-Promises-OReilly-Paranormal-ebook/dp/B0091K78NC/ref=sr_1_2?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1351184824&sr=1-2

Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,076 Paid in Kindle Store

   * #33 in Kindle Store > Kindle eBooks > Fiction > Genre Fiction > Mystery & Thrillers > Mystery > Women Sleuths
   * #35 in Books > Mystery, Thriller & Suspense > Mystery > Women Sleuths
   * #72 in Books > Romance > Fantasy & Futuristic

Also, from ireaderreview, "Top 100 Indie Authors for August + 46 Authors to Watch" http://ireaderreview.com/2012/08/13/top-100-indie-authors-for-august-46-authors-to-watch/ She has estimated sale figures for Terri Reid for the month of July 2012 as 7,620. It's clear from other posts that she figures out the estimated numbers, they are not author-supplied. I sent her an email asking how she does that. (I believe amazon does not publicly release sales figures for competitive reasons.) Trudyjh (talk) 17:44, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Trudyjh, book sales figures and best-seller status are not considered "notable" (by Wikipedia definition). WP:AUTHOR is the most stringent Wikipedia definition of "notable". Or it can meet the WP:GNG definition of "notable" which is easier. Basically need sources that discuss the author, like newspaper articles etc.. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 02:12, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The proposed deleter has twice removed the ref to a newspaper article because it also appears in a blog. In fairness (perhaps he or she is not aware that bloggers sometimes write for newspapers, for example, the paid blogger Sheila Lennon writes for the Providence Journal) I have restored both and even left the blog ref in first place ahead of the newspaper.

There are numerous sources that discuss the author. However they are mostly blogs. Are we restricted to fast disappearing paper sources for notability? If so, that is behind the times. For example:

Terri Reid sells 60,000 ebooks first year: http://jimthewriterb.wordpress.com/2011/08/22/terri-reid-sells-60000-ebooks-in-her-first-year/

Meet the author Terri Reid http://dawnrachel.com/meet-the-author-terri-reid/

Newbie's Guide to Publishing http://jakonrath.blogspot.com/2011/01/guest-post-by-terri-reid.html

Trudyjh (talk) 11:31, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above references are from blogs or an interview. They don't meet the requirements of being reliable, independent references. The "newspspaer article" you say I keep removing is a few sentences and then says "Read more here". Clicking "Read more here" takes you to a regular blog, not a newspaper blog. The regular blog's link is still in the article. In cases like these, you use the primary source of the information, not the references that says "read more here". Bgwhite (talk) 15:14, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Very strong DELETE. She fails WP:AUTHOR and WP:BK. No WP:RS whatsoever to establish notability. The article's author apparently has zero idea of how Wikipedia works, despite having been around here for quite some time. That is very odd. Qworty (talk) 05:25, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - It's great that Reid has managed to do well through self-publishing. There's probably more opportunity these days to make a living writing without needing the support of a major publishing company. However, the question is of inclusion in Wikipedia and for there needs to be significant coverage in reliable sources. There is some local coverage, but we need coverage of wider scope to establish inclusion. -- Whpq (talk) 16:32, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - The person fails WP:AUTHOR and the more general WP:BASIC. Over half the article is about the book series, not about the author, and the book series also appears to fail notability under WP:BK. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 22:33, 31 October 2012 (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.