Deletion of Aaron Gwyn

Comment: The limited reviews and other third party coverage indicate the subject fails both  and . I agree that having been published somewhere isn't the same as having received coverage indicating the significance of the publication — clearly not everyone published |enjoys derivative significance. This subject's work is demonstrably below the threshold of .  is also a far cry for the reasons stated above — and I found both citations and h-index in the single digits
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:WRITER||WP:INHERIT||WP:ANYBIO||WP:PROFESSOR)

Comment: The Kirkus review (from Feb) shows up twice. I don't think repeating the ''same'' review makes the article any mroe sourced. The newspaper review helps, as I mentioned, but overall still doesn't make the reviews substantial enough to pass . See JFHjr's rationale above
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WRITER)