Deletion of Steph Adams

Comment: A super hot lady that is talented-- and with at least one good looking co-author (I could be a fan)-- might be encyclopedic to those that like food, or to a select other few, but at this time sources don't appear to be there to satisfy the Wikipedia inclusion criteria, for an encyclopedia. If there is doubt about separating reliable sources "by her" or "about her" then, since this is a |BLP, we default to not enough coverage at this time for notability. Also --"best seller" appears to be book selling advertisement. Her other writings besides the "best selling book"{{Dubious}} so far-- has been associated with "table top magazine" writings. Ref-bombing 26 general references, without a single inline citation would likely, in the real Wikipedia world where BLP's are held to a higher standard for sources and citations, should have probably resulted in some speedy delete anyway. Given time I am sure there will be more interest, more books (just one book seems to not satisfy other criteria like -- as noted by the last paragraph there) and co-authors, more notability, and sources other than Penguin Random House or Amazon (like New York best seller list), to verify actual "best seller", and I am sure she will return
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP||WP:BIO1E)

Comment: The problem with assessing articles on people who have been successful in the media like this is that it is often difficult to separate coverage ''by'' the person from coverage ''about'' the person.  In this case, there is a long list of sources in the article, but as far as I can tell they're either from entities that are not independent (such as her publisher), or they are not primarily about Adams; they're on her book, or her other work.  This isn't to suggest that she's not a talented individual, but I don't see that she meets the  yet
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)