Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ann Dupuis

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 keep. Good work by JHunterJ. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:52, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ann Dupuis

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

no sign of notability. ceo of a company does not make you automatically notable. article does not say much else.. Tracer9999 (talk) 02:14, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:19, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:20, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - It didn't say much else, but you didn't give me much of a chance to work on it. I have expanded it, and will try to look for more sources. BOZ (talk) 02:38, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Preliminary merge to Grey Ghost Press--her notability appears to be mostly linked to that company, and I can't find anything to support her independent notability so far. Jclemens (talk) 03:50, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge both to Fudge (role-playing game system), which is the only article with substantial information. Borock (talk) 09:39, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as award-nomination and regarded as an important figure or widely cited by peers or successors (WP:AUTHOR). -- JHunterJ (talk) 20:17, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per JHunterJ - thanks for finding another source. BOZ (talk) 21:44, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Fudge (role-playing game system). The only independent source cited is a blog, which in general are not considered reliable sources, thus insufficient to establish notability.--70.80.234.196 (talk) 23:31, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a personal blog. It's a professional blog by a peer organization, which works per WP:ACADEMIC and WP:AUTHOR. Also, the Origins award nomination source is a reliable source, even though it's not independent, per WP:RS#Self-published and questionable sources as sources on themselves. -- JHunterJ (talk) 12:58, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - this is still being constructed, so I would like the rescuers a few more days to find better sources. Bearian (talk) 19:07, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unstated in my last comment is my thought that it should be merged if the sourcing not improved. Bearian (talk) 20:49, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:HEY due to improvements by JHunterJ et al. Bearian (talk) 19:54, 22 March 2011 (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.