Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vikki Petraitis

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 Consensus clearly shows a keep, though the argument is very weak. Only one minimal web reference provided that actually talks about the person and so notability is only just asserted. -- maelgwn - talk 04:04, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vikki Petraitis[edit]

Delete No notability proved. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 06:43, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Nn author, possible COI. STORMTRACKER 94 12:56, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 21:22, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep I have tidied it up a little and it looks a little more presentable now. I agree the creator of the article has a likely COI, but it is not gratuitous or overly self-promotional. The Five Mile Press is a legitimate publisher, not a vanity publisher and so is Black Inc. She was nominated in the 2007 Davitt Awards, which are well known enough to receive coverage in the The Age, Melbourne's leading broadsheet newspaper - see here. There is also this information on Petraitis here; it is from a blog and not reliable enough to use in the article, but it states that she won an award, has appeared on the television show, Sensing Murder and wrote a book on the Frankston, Victoria serial killer, Paul Denyer, in whose article she is listed in the "Further reading" section. The article needs work, but I think it can be saved. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 21:56, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Commen t: Can somebody explain how someone whose first work was published in 1993 was one of the first writers in the true crime genre? True crime has been around a lot longer than since 1993. Corvus cornix_talk 05:48, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It is uncited - remove it if you think it is wrong. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 10:05, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Mattinbgn is convincing despite the COI issue. --Lockley (talk) 19:24, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per awards that she's nominated for. Just falls over the notability line, in my opinion. Lankiveil (talk) 11:25, 26 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
Keep, I agree with user:Lankiveil (above). She has a little bit of notability, enough to keep the article.Lester 05:59, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep Per previously cited opinions of Mattibgn, Lankiveil and ors. Thewinchester ^(talk) 12:39, 28 December 2007 (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.