Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emmy van Deurzen

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. MBisanz ^talk 02:12, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Emmy van Deurzen

No third-party references indicating notability; self-promotion. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 19:07, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Someone near the top of her field. EvD would appear to have worked on this article herself, but that is not uncommon on WP. (Her spouse diagnosed me as suffering from AS, which might be my own COI.) Philip Cross (talk) 19:27, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - could not find significant independent reliable sources to establish notability.--Boffob (talk) 20:31, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete — She's not near the top of her field, and not very well documented by independant, secondary sources. The article reads like an advert and this isn't helped by the fact the only references are those written by herself. It should also be noted that Philip Cross (talk · contribs) is a contributor to this article. —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 20:32, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, I also was not able to find any independent sources on this person. Strongly suspect it fails WP:BIO. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 04:22, 29 November 2008 (UTC).[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 03:27, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 03:28, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep A clear keeper. She clearly is at the top of her field, having headed the United Kingdom Council for Psychotherapy, a major UK professional organization, founded organizations in her subspecialty, was Dean of school of psychotherapy at Regent's College and has written / edited major works for major publishers. 100+ gbooks hits, glancing at the previews verifies many claims.John Z (talk) 09:19, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per JohnZ. Article needs some cleanup, though. --Crusio (talk) 10:25, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. A WorldCat search returned 31 book entries. The most widely held is available in e-book format from 734 libraries worldwide - Paradox and passion in psychotherapy, published in 1998. The second most widely help is available in print from 228 libraries.--Eric Yurken (talk) 14:57, 1 December 2008 (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.