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. John254 00:32, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Julia DeVillers[edit]

Julia DeVillers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

expired prod on short BLP about an author whose book became a Disney movie, so some claim to notability, but apparently not so notable to be able to find a birth date, year, or place - 3 red flags of non-notability. Carlossuarez46 01:38, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep She's written several books which are published by Random House [1], E.P. Dutton and Penguin [2]. Here's a review in publishers weekly [3]. One of these books was turned into a Disney film [4] [5][6]. She passes the notability guidelines easily. Arguing she should be deleted because there isn't a birthdate given is absurd, try asking half the women you know when their birthdate was and arguing they should be deleted from life if they won't tell you. I'm guessing you didn't check for sources at all. Nick mallory 03:17, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh I didn't realize that deleting a biography on WP is equivalent to being deleted from life. Carlossuarez46 03:32, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't. I'm merely making that (absurd) point to show up your (absurd) argument that the lack of an author's birthdate from an article means that article should be deleted. Did you happen to see the links to the film, her books published by major publishers, the review etc? Do you still think she should be deleted? Nick mallory 03:57, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep As WP:BLP points out, one's birthdate can be a privacy concern nowadays; it can also be a vanity concern. Either of these would be enough to explain it being difficult or impossible to find. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 04:40, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, passes WP:BIO regardless of the availability of a birthdate, the importance of which seems to be overlooked by our notability guidelines. --Dhartung | Talk 07:36, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Seems notable, and the lack of a birthdate doesn't bother me. Lots of people don't like to disclose that info, and it's possible that she's writing under a pen name or something of that nature. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 21:38, 18 September 2007 (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.