Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Helen Grant

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 per consensus. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 17:53, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Helen Grant

Helen Grant (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Article about a ghostwriter, something of a puff piece. Third party references aren't what you'd call reliable or significant in coverage. I'm also guessing the article's creator has something of a conflict of interest. Many of the claims are unreferenced and as celebrities are loathe to admit to using a ghostwriter these claims seem unlikely to be verified. So here it is for your perusal and opinions. Polly (Parrot) 23:50, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Speedy Keep: I am the primary author of this article. I am new to Wikipedia and I am still figuring out how the site works, including policy and guidelines. I have amended the article the best I can, including referencing, but would appreciate some advice on any further improvements that could be made. Due to the secrecy surrounding the business of ghostwriting, it is not known how many books credited to other 'authors' Grant has been involved with, but one of her known books is Escape Domestic Violence (Hodder, 2007). There are other ghostwriters listed at Wikipedia. If this article should be deleted then I request all other ghostwriter pages be deleted too, including Clifford Thurlow and Andrew Crofts. Helen Grant is not only a ghostwriter, but an author, journalist and the founder of H ezine as well. I believe this makes her a notable person, but if this doesn't fall under Wikipedia guidelines, I am happy to make any alterations and improvements necessary to avoid deletion. Please advise! (Vintagewriter) 03:50, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

• First off, welcome to Wikipedia. I've placed a {{Rescue}} tag on the article, to see if we can get you some help on rewriting this article to an encyclopedic standard. I must caution you though, comparing this article to other ghostwriters is a fallacy. Our standards for inclusion are objective, meaning that each article must meet our notability guidelines on it's own, and not because "all ghostwriters are notable." -- RoninBK _{T C} 16:47, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
• Comment Thankyou RoninBK for flagging the article. I have started work on it, but there is a spartan amount of Reliable Soures available for the subject. The article contained a lot of primary sources, or just links to the websites mentioned as references. I have removed the sources that do not qualify under WP:RS, and added {{fact}} where needed but there's not much left. Only one book published, although if a source can be found for the book published in 1983 for the prince then that might help. I don't know if even the Rescue Squad and fix this one... Fosnez (talk) 20:57, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. —Pixelface (talk) 02:19, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
• Comment I am the primary author of this article, and would first of all like to say thank you for your assistance in helping to rewrite the article to encyclopedic standards. This is something I had little experience of. I have drastically reduced the length of this article, leaving just the information of which proven sources can be found. I will re-add the additional information when I am able to find valid supporting sources. Thank you once again. (Vintagewriter) 03:30, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
• Keep Excellent work, article is now a perfectly serviceable stub. -- RoninBK _{T C} 13:33, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
• Keep per above. Rudget. 16:46, 20 March 2008 (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.