Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lisa M. Wolfe

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, consensus is that the article fails the notability guidelines. Davewild (talk) 18:44, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lisa M. Wolfe

Non notable yoga instructor. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 00:12, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. —Ism schism (talk) 00:14, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. —Ism schism (talk) 00:14, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - this person has a decent publication history, but with small publishers/magazines that anybody could get published by. She does not qualify as a notable academic. Nothing wrong with that, but there are probably a thousand other yoga instructors who are just as noteable. The principal author of the page is Wolfeppt. - Richard Cavell (talk) 10:41, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Further checking shows that at least some of these publishers are print-on-demand publishing houses having author fees to publish, i.e. vanity presses, (see e.g. the "publish your book now" button on the Equilibrium Books website, which "published" her book 'Off The Wall- Exercise for Climbers'). Bordering on advertising, the article also lists individual appearances at non-notable events, offers a lengthy list of unverified interviews in obscure specialty magazines (e.g. typing "wolfe" in the "Hour Detroit" magazine search box returned no hits on the subject). The article tries very hard to manufacture a notability where, unfortunately, none exists.Agricola44 (talk) 20:02, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I did try to establish whether those publishers were vanity presses. Thanks for finding the appropriate info, Agricola. Given that they're vanity presses, those publications do not count toward notability at all. - Richard Cavell (talk) 06:42, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above, non notable. Dbrodbeck (talk) 01:06, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. —Ism schism (talk) 03:47, 18 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.