Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Matthews (writer)

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. Shereth 20:29, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

John Matthews (writer)

British author with no references to prove notability. A Google search turns up this, which doesn't even look to be the same person. Username of original creator is Jmatt11, suggesting a possible conflict of interest as well. BradV 02:12, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Yet another non-notable autobiography on Wikipedia.--CyberGhostface (talk) 02:55, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This [1] is the author, not the link per the nominator. I looked up the notability claim of one of his books, Past Imperfect being a bestseller and on a Times list. I found nothing to verify this. The book does in fact exist, on both Amazon [2] and Amazon UK [3] though neither stock it. In the media, I can find little on the author. He does appear in one Google news result [4] (First result), but a paid result so can't tell the contents. As such, none of books seem to pass WP:BK and as an author he certainly doesn't appear to meet notability requirements, hence I vote a strong delete. Rasadam (talk) 09:09, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The claim that Past Perfect was in a Times top-ten list seems accurate[5]. He's also published by HarperCollins and Penguin, i.e. not a vanity press. According to the cover art, Past Imperfect was a bestseller, but I cant find proof of that. Amazon also quotes from a Times review which I'm having trouble finding. Pburka (talk) 16:04, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't see any mention of the book in that list. Secondly, this doesn't appear as an official Times top 10 list, but rather an op-ed with the author's favourite books in the genre. Rasadam (talk) 07:30, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep if books can be referenced Dreamspy (talk) 19:28, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:03, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The Times of London link by Pburka has almost no content. Doesn't prove this person's notability. Artene50 (talk) 04:27, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - unable to find any reliable sources about the author. The most prominent book does not appear to have any significant reviews that I could find. And the claim for being on a top 10 list is really an opinion piece in the Times online. -- Whpq (talk) 19:57, 8 July 2008 (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.