Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Timothy Tan Jia Jun

: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 delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:41, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

=[[Timothy Tan Jia Jun]]=

:{{la|Timothy Tan Jia Jun}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Timothy_Tan_Jia_Jun Stats])

:({{Find sources|Timothy Tan Jia Jun}})

I was unable to find reliable sources verifying that this author meets Wikipedia's notability criteria. Prod removed by creator without comment or improvement of sources. FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 00:25, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Keep: timothytanjiajun.weebly.com (Speed of Light/The Beautiful Rain) Here is the evidence. Please do let me know if you do need more. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Satiagorobertson (talk • contribs) 12:02, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

:That appears to be a personal web site. What's needed is reliable, independent sources - the reviews of his novel that have been published in newspapers (NOT his school paper or hometown paper, in general), magazines, literary journals... that sort of thing. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:19, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:14, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:14, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

  • Delete The book is not to be published until November, There is no evidence in the article, that it will be other than self-published, nor is such information even in the personal web site. Nothing else in the article is even remotely notable. Frankly, I would have deleted it as A7, no plausible indication of notability combined with G11, entirely self-promotional. It should never have gotten so far, but I'll let someone else close the discussion.

: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.