Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GJ Stoutimore

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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 01:37, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GJ Stoutimore[edit]

[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)

There is zero evidence of the subject's notability on any standard. Virtually every source is either to the subject's own writing, links to buy the subject's book, or marketing material. (Even apparently reliable sources are not; the Kirkus Reviews source is actually from "Kirkus Indie," a paid placement, and the BookTrib.com reviews are also paid placements on a book marketing platform.) Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:52, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The book has no notable reviews as explained, and there is no coverage of the author otherwise. What's used now in the article is primary sourcing or product placements. Oaktree b (talk) 01:39, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, England, Florida, and New Hampshire. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:18, 13 May 2024 (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.