Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lee McKenzie (author)

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. Sandstein 22:31, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lee McKenzie (author)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

The subject fails general notability guidelines as well as WP:AUTHOR. Having researched, I haven't found any coverage in reliable secondary sources Less Unless (talk) 21:52, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Less Unless (talk) 21:52, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:55, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete articles lacks the type of secondary sources that establish notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:28, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I've found lots of hits to her writings, by her but nothing, literally zero, about her. Please ping me if you find a needle in the haystack. Bearian (talk) 16:43, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Writers are not handed an automatic notability freebie just because their writing exists — the notability test for writers requires reliably sourced evidence of their significance, such as winning or being nominated for notable national literary awards and/or having enough critical attention about their work in newspaper book review sections and/or literary journals to make a WP:GNG claim. But I share everybody else's failure to find any sources that would change the equation here: literally all I can find, even when I search ProQuest for the kind of "contemporaneous to the books themselves" coverage that might not have Googled properly, is a couple of smalltown local event calendars that briefly mention her name as the giver of an upcoming book reading. That's not the kind of "coverage" we're looking for, however. Bearcat (talk) 18:59, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Agreed with all above. Expertwikiguy (talk) 16:49, 5 February 2020 (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.