Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sam Jane Brown

:{{la|Sam Jane Brown}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Sam_Jane_Brown Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Sam Jane Brown}})

Brown has written and self-published on Amazon a single book, and then published a ton of press releases about said book. Because examiner(dot)com is blacklisted as a Wikipedia source, references to that site have been rewritten as "examine(dot)com". But they're also just more unreliable "reviews" (really ads) for this book. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:58, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:16, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:16, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

• Delete For all the above reasons. Fails WP:GNG and WP:BIO. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:34, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
• Keep : Notable per coverage. SarahKrauch (talk) 18:22, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

::Welcome to Wikipedia.E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:51, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

• Delete as per Nom.E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:36, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
• Delete Note that the Reuters links (all 3 of them) are copies of the same PR Newswire press release, with the fine print saying "* Reuters is not responsible for the content in this press release." I didn't realize that Reuters did this, so note-to-self to check Reuters links carefully in the future. LaMona (talk) 04:34, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

: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.