| Revision as of 17:51, 31 January 2015 editDr. Blofeld (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors636,183 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:53, 31 January 2015 edit undoVictuallers (talk | contribs)Administrators166,508 edits Absurd nomination, clearly notableNext edit → | ||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
| :<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the ]. ] (]) 14:35, 31 January 2015 (UTC)</small> | :<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the ]. ] (]) 14:35, 31 January 2015 (UTC)</small> | ||
| :<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the ]. ] (]) 14:35, 31 January 2015 (UTC)</small> | :<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the ]. ] (]) 14:35, 31 January 2015 (UTC)</small> | ||
| *'''Speedy keep''' Absurd nomination, clearly notable, and ''thankyou'' {{u|Drmies}} for the initial legwork. (thx for phrasing this Dr. B ] (]) 20:53, 31 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 20:53, 31 January 2015
Lulu Wang
- Lulu Wang (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This article does not meet WP:ARTIST or WP:GNG. Contains a lot of factual errors, no major coverage in reliable sources. MaRAno 10:04, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- Comment: The creator of this article, Drmies, delisted Lips Are Movin – an article the nominator has worked on extensively – as a good article a few hours before this nomination was made. Seems like a classic case of WP:REVENGE. I'm remaining neutral for now, though a quick Google search showed at least some coverage: –Chase (talk / contribs) 21:40, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- After seeing more sources that have been added, it's an obvious keep from me. Closer should consider a speedy keep – WP:SK#2 may be applicable as this nomination is disruptive, vexatious, and has extremely questionable motives. –Chase (talk / contribs) 17:23, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
- Thank you Chase: yeah, that's kind of silly. It's ironic: this article was created after a prompt on Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Women writers/Missing articles; I suspect either Rosiestep or Ipigott added it. Rosiestep, like you I'm always looking for the DYK and perhaps you can find a thing or two. Coverage is not so easy for a non-English writer, but we'll find it through the DBNL, for instance. With that many books in such a small country, she's bound to be notable, and I have no doubt that MaranoFan will do the decent thing and withdraw the nomination. I'll beef up the article, of course. Drmies (talk) 22:33, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Can't see any valid reason to delete. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 22:55, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- Snow keep. If the nominator had done a bit of googling, they would have learned that Lulu Wang was the "best-selling Dutch author of 1997". In addition to adding this gem, I've expanded the article with other content to include inline citations. Check out her Authority Control -- quite awesome, indeed. --Rosiestep (talk) 02:40, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
- Speedy keep Absurd nomination, clearly notable, and thankyou Drmies for the initial legwork..♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:51, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:35, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:35, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
- Speedy keep Absurd nomination, clearly notable, and thankyou Drmies for the initial legwork. (thx for phrasing this Dr. B Victuallers (talk) 20:53, 31 January 2015 (UTC)