Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zeena Schreck

=[[Zeena Schreck]]=

:{{la|Zeena Schreck}} – (View AfDView log{{•}} {{plainlink|1=http://toolserver.org/~betacommand/cgi-bin/afdparser?afd={{urlencode:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zeena Schreck}}|2=AfD statistics}})

:({{Find sources|Zeena Schreck}})

Long unreferenced BLP, questionable notability, full of gossip Yworo (talk) 05:30, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:59, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:59, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:00, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:00, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment The individual does have some coverage[http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/latimes/access/22357182.html?dids=22357182:22357182&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&type=current&date=Nov+08%2C+1997&author=&pub=Los+Angeles+Times&desc=Anton+LaVey%3B+Founded+the+Church+of+Satan&pqatl=google][http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/washingtonpost/access/33508402.html?dids=33508402:33508402&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&type=current&date=Aug+30%2C+1998&author=Jack+Boulware&pub=The+Washington+Post&desc=A+DEVIL+OF+A+TIME%3B+How+Is+the+Church+of+Satan+Getting+Along%3F+Not+So+Hot.&pqatl=google][http://www.villagevoice.com/2002-07-30/news/devil-in-disguise/http][http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-6945791/Sex-and-the-postmodern-magician.html][http://books.google.com/books?as_brr=0&as_pub=-icon&q=%22Zeena+Schreck%22] and the article may be salvagable... but it does needs a MAJOR sandblasting. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 05:07, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Among those five examples of "coverage", [http://www.villagevoice.com/2002-07-30/news/devil-in-disguise/http this] is a fascinating article indeed -- but ZS has only a bit part within it. Hoary (talk) 21:12, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Well... that article offers something more than a trivial mention, it addresses the subject directly and in detail... and WP:GNG specifically allows that the subject need not be the main topic of the source material. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 04:40, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Here's the direct and detailed (or not) address: Some of [her dad's] diabolic transmissions can be heard as well on the somewhat campy 1966 LP The Satanic Mass, which features various unholy rituals, most spectacularly the demonic baptism of his three-and-a-half-year-old daughter, Zeena. ¶ Zeena Schreck was most likely the world's first famous Satanic toddler. Besides practicing the black arts, Schreck too is a musician; also an actress, photographer, and writer. She reigned as High Priestess and public spokesperson of the Church of Satan from 1985 until her resignation in 1990. "World's most famous [anything]" is always promising, but unfortunately I can't think of any other satanic toddlers and suspect that there's little competition. -- Hoary (talk) 04:53, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Question: She's second author of a book that I (in the reality-based community) vaguely infer consists of twaddle and that Amazon says is "Bestsellers Rank: #1,347,382 in Books": rather dismal in its own genre, if you consider that [http://www.amazon.com/Modern-Magick-Lessons-Magickal-Llewellyns/dp/0875423248 this thing] makes it to "#10,458 in Books". It's claimed that she's a photographer -- any noteworthy exhibitions or published photobooks? -- Hoary (talk) 21:12, 20 June 2010 (UTC)


:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

  • Delete for now. I LOL'd a little at the ranking# 1,347,382 in Books. JBsupreme (talk) ✄ ✄ ✄ 02:06, 26 June 2010 (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.