Deletion of Russet Noon

Comment: Time to pack the |snowball
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Snowball clause (WP:SNOW)

Comment: per  and Wikipedia:Notability_(books)#Not_yet_published_books|WP:BOOKS. In any case, if kept the article needs a heavy rewrite and the author (if {{User|Ladysybilla}} is actually the same Lady Sybilla as the author) needs to pay attention to . Also, the source at buzznet focuses on the copyright issue - and the article should too, rather than reproducing the plot of a book that hasn't been published yet
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL||WP:COI)

Comment: An article about an unpublished work of fanfiction, written by its author, and cited exclusively by |unreliable sources?  That doesn't add up to any kind of claim to |notability
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:N)

Comment: non-notable fanfiction that can never be properly published due to its author's complete and bizarre misunderstandings of intellectual property law. I speedied this yesterday as spam but it was quickly recreated; at least having a full discussion gives us the option of using #G4
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion (WP:CSD)

Comment: possible speedy delete per #G11|Criteria G11 as blatant advertising
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion (WP:CSD)

Comment: Agree with above that this may even qualify for speedy delete per #G11|Criteria G11 as well as 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion (WP:CSD||WP:SOAP)

Comment: I'm another one of the speediers for this article and her bio article. Delete per  and . Seems to me to be little more than an attempt to use Wikipedia to promote herself and a non-notable unpublished/unpublishable ripoff of ''Twilight
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL||WP:SOAP)