Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mary Jane Auch

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The result was withdrawn Thryduulf (talk) 09:49, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mary Jane Auch

Article contains no information besides listing one seemingly unnotable book by this author. The only other thing is a link to the author's website, and the page has not been notably updated or edited since November. PasswordUsername (talk) 13:28, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am withdrawing this nominaiton – author is indeed notable. I'll look into fixing this also. Thanks, DGG. PasswordUsername (talk) 07:04, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 14:14, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete A Google search suggests that she has individually, and jointly with her husband Herm Auch, written and illustrated at least 10 children's books. I can't find any in depth coverage about her though that would provide reliable sources for a Wikipedia article. It is possible that one or more of her books is notable, I have not looked. Thryduulf (talk) 16:05, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, certainly notable, published by Random House and Bantam Books. I have added an infobox and citations, haven't done more as have little time at present. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:33, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep Important childrens author. His novel, One handed catch is actually in over 2200 libraries according of WorldCatIdentities [1], with about 100 reviews in Google News Archive, including Publishers Weekly, NY Times, School Library Journal, etc etc. --the sort of secondary references that establish notability. [2] . Her many other books similarly. 13 books with over 1000 holdings each, and which will have multiple reviews, because that's the basis on which public libraries buy-an extremely strong record. WP:BEFORE should be obligatory to prevent this careless nomination. Of course, it still needs to be done right: a plain g search doesn't turn up the right material specifically enough. GNewsArchive is now the easy way for reviews of popular books--a great convenience.DGG (talk) 00:11, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per DGG's research. matt91486 (talk) 01:42, 29 June 2009 (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.