Deletion of Linda A. Malcor

Comment: The Melia review https://www.jstor.org/stable/1500183, in particular, makes clear how y her Arthurian theories are, much more so than our article does. In any case nothing in the article is adequately sourced or presents even a plausible case for notability. The reviews of the book make it potentially notable, and if an article on the book existed then we could redirect the author's name to it per BIO1E, but do we really need an article on a book of badly-argued fringe Arthuriana theories
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fringe theories (WP:FRINGE)

Comment: basically per nom and Rockphed above. Nothing here to indicate passing either  or  or . One minor correction to the nom's comment. The article was created (and extensively edited) by
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:GNG||WP:AUTHOR)

Comment: I have found 7 reviews of the book ''From Scythia to Camelot: A Radical Reassessment of the Legends of King Arthur, the Knights of the Round Table and the Holy Grail'', but so far, no reviews of her fiction. That would suggest that the book is notable per , and this author could be redirected to the book - if someone wants to write an article about it
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NBOOK)