The result was delete. A numerical reading of this debate might lead one to a no consensus close, however, a careful reading shows no reliable sources, and a clear policy-based consensus that this article should go. Courcelles 00:29, 11 September 2010 (UTC) reply
![]() | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
No particular evidence given that it meets notability guidelines. Previously deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fledgling Jason Steed, endorsed at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 April 12, and G4'd several times since then. Most recent G4 nom declined by User:Frank. After creator moved it to his userpage, this discussion resulted in its being moved to a subpage, from where it was moved earlier today. Also previously discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jason Steed and Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Beehold, and currently the subject of an ANI thread. SarekOfVulcan ( talk) 18:45, 4 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Comment: the author's article has also been put up for AfD: see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark A. Cooper (author). Perhaps these two AfDs should be merged? -- The Anome ( talk) 20:04, 4 September 2010 (UTC) reply
To post a review on amazon you must open an account and make a purchase with a credit card. But I don't think thoses reviews are being claimed as facts. Please stick to the facts, the Sunderland Echo is not a local paper, an authors review is exactly what it is, a review by a peer. ( Oliver Spy Fan ( talk) 19:06, 5 September 2010 (UTC)) 82.7.40.7 ( talk) 18:42, 5 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Here is the Sunderland Echo story. It wasn't on their website - I don't know why - but here is the PDF copy they agreed to upload to Wikipedia. [4] It was part of a feature on YA books, with a special emphasise on Robert Muchamore and Mark Cooper.-- Itshayfevertime ( talk) 22:56, 10 September 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. A numerical reading of this debate might lead one to a no consensus close, however, a careful reading shows no reliable sources, and a clear policy-based consensus that this article should go. Courcelles 00:29, 11 September 2010 (UTC) reply
![]() | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
No particular evidence given that it meets notability guidelines. Previously deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fledgling Jason Steed, endorsed at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 April 12, and G4'd several times since then. Most recent G4 nom declined by User:Frank. After creator moved it to his userpage, this discussion resulted in its being moved to a subpage, from where it was moved earlier today. Also previously discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jason Steed and Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Beehold, and currently the subject of an ANI thread. SarekOfVulcan ( talk) 18:45, 4 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Comment: the author's article has also been put up for AfD: see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark A. Cooper (author). Perhaps these two AfDs should be merged? -- The Anome ( talk) 20:04, 4 September 2010 (UTC) reply
To post a review on amazon you must open an account and make a purchase with a credit card. But I don't think thoses reviews are being claimed as facts. Please stick to the facts, the Sunderland Echo is not a local paper, an authors review is exactly what it is, a review by a peer. ( Oliver Spy Fan ( talk) 19:06, 5 September 2010 (UTC)) 82.7.40.7 ( talk) 18:42, 5 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Here is the Sunderland Echo story. It wasn't on their website - I don't know why - but here is the PDF copy they agreed to upload to Wikipedia. [4] It was part of a feature on YA books, with a special emphasise on Robert Muchamore and Mark Cooper.-- Itshayfevertime ( talk) 22:56, 10 September 2010 (UTC) reply