Deletion of James Bibby

Comment: Not covered in depth by secondary sources as required by .  I know that WP articles are not required to be interesting but this one is a good example of uninterestingness being a side effect of being unnotable. The article says nothing but that he's a writer and lists his books. Having said all that I wish him well in his career
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: Contrary to the nom’s assertion that there is no coverage for the subject, I have found references in support of the subject's notability, including http://www.edlin.org/sf/eng/humour/bibby.html this 3rd party review of Bibby’s sci/fi-humour novels; http://www.itrackmine.com/userarea/lists/products/productdetail.php?iProductUnq=5141389&iVAU=-1 this book review; and http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/b/james-bibby/ this link to Fantastic Fiction which has a bibliography of James Bibby's books, with the latest releases, covers, descriptions and availability. Also his http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1154702/ IMBD page also confirms that he is a TV writer, further verifying his notability. This is enough to meet 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:AUTHOR)

Comment: No reliable sources found establishing that he passes either  or 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:CREATIVE)