Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Catherine Kaputa

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 no consensus. The nomination provides various rationales for deletion, also stating that the article is promotional, and the delete !vote following the nomination casually states that the subject fails "various" notability criteria, but doesn't state which ones or how so. The following keep !vote presents several sources that suggest WP:NAUTHOR may be met, but after two relistings, nobody else has offered any opinion about their veracity. Furthermore, the notion that the article is promotional was not concurred with by any other users. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:30, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Catherine Kaputa

[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)

Struggling to find any independent in-depth coverage in reliable sources - lack of WP:SIGCOV. Fails WP:BIO and WP:NACADEMIC (no more than 39 cites on Google Scholar for any of her stuff). Run-of-the-mill businesswoman. Promotional article, created by a WP:SPA. Edwardx (talk) 12:15, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete She fails the various notabillty criteria.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:12, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. ^Thanks,L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 13:20, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. ^Thanks,L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 13:20, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. ^Thanks,L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 13:20, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. ^Thanks,L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 13:20, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There are more than three thousand library holdings of her books: [1]. Publishers Weekly has a book review of The Female Brand [2] and other coverage [3][4] [5]. James500 (talk) 15:10, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kpg jhp jm 17:14, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:07, 3 October 2018 (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.