The result was Keep per multiple reliable sources. Beeblebrox ( talk) 17:18, 5 March 2010 (UTC) reply
Soon to come book, no independent reliable sources found about it, the author doesn't have a wikipedia page so it's not notable through that. -Zeus- u| c 00:59, 17 February 2010 (UTC) reply
*Delete while its true that LA times covered A lady gaga bio, it didnt cover THIS bio, which is from a nonnotable publisher (follow the bouncing isbn). the la times article book, from overlook, probably deserves an article.
Mercurywoodrose (
talk) 03:48, 18 February 2010 (UTC)changed to keep, as it now appears true that there are 2 editions of this book in 2 publishing regions, under the one author name.
Mercurywoodrose (
talk) 05:46, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
reply
Delete Besides the fact i hate lady gaga, this book is not very notable. Str8cash ( talk) 23:28, 25 February 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was Keep per multiple reliable sources. Beeblebrox ( talk) 17:18, 5 March 2010 (UTC) reply
Soon to come book, no independent reliable sources found about it, the author doesn't have a wikipedia page so it's not notable through that. -Zeus- u| c 00:59, 17 February 2010 (UTC) reply
*Delete while its true that LA times covered A lady gaga bio, it didnt cover THIS bio, which is from a nonnotable publisher (follow the bouncing isbn). the la times article book, from overlook, probably deserves an article.
Mercurywoodrose (
talk) 03:48, 18 February 2010 (UTC)changed to keep, as it now appears true that there are 2 editions of this book in 2 publishing regions, under the one author name.
Mercurywoodrose (
talk) 05:46, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
reply
Delete Besides the fact i hate lady gaga, this book is not very notable. Str8cash ( talk) 23:28, 25 February 2010 (UTC) reply