Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ellen Alpsten

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. ✗plicit 23:58, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ellen Alpsten

[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)

Written by a sock farm of a de facto banned editor with no other significant input from other editors. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 23:55, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 23:55, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note, the image at Commons is a copyvio, and I've tagged for speedy there. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 02:16, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete There is always a problem finding "coverage" of writers whose bylines create a cloud of not-GNG-relevant Google hits. One recent book was shortlisted for two prizes--not quite NAUTHOR. If that book and its sequel(s) keep getting attention, the missing in-depth coverage by independent RS may materialize. Alternatively, this bio might redirect to an article about the book. HouseOfChange (talk) 02:30, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - she misses NAUTHOR by a bit, but the two books might scrape NBOOK. It may be TOOSOON - perhaps the projected set of four, once published, would do the trick. Ingratis (talk) 06:02, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 06:59, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 06:59, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kenya-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 06:59, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 06:59, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 06:59, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The sockmaster was blocked after this article was created, so it seems we must go the AfD route. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Henrytoxteth15 is relevant here. Considering Alpsten on her merits, she fails WP:NAUTHOR Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 15:24, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and maybe recreate the article in the future. It's a close call to me but I lean towards deletion. There seems to be almost enough between reviews in Lancashire Evening Post,[1][2] Publisher's Weekly,[3] and a piece in the Telegraph.[4] However, a lot of other reviews seem more niche and their reliability isn't clear (History of Royal Women[5] seems to do sponsored posts and I don't know if Better Reading[6] is reliable). Probably best to wait and see if she receives more attention. Her debut novel was in 2020, this might just be WP:TOOSOON. BuySomeApples (talk) 02:17, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: @BuySomeApples: both of her books have also been reviewed in The Times - the references were formatted in such a way that that was not immediately apparent. Does that affectt your opinion? Ingratis (talk) 04:52, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom fails WP:NAUTHOR .Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 16:18, 16 January 2022 (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.