Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Les Edgerton

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. Sandstein 18:49, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Les Edgerton

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Les Edgerton (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

BLP with no sources. A search turned up no independent reliable sources--I found one article that cited Edgerton's book Hooked in a footnote, but that's it. blameless 01:45, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. blameless 01:45, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Z1720 (talk) 02:02, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. Z1720 (talk) 02:02, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

• Delete Fails WP:AUTHOR and WP:GNG. #3 of WP:AUTHOR gives notability if there are multiple periodical articles or reviews of his work. Although I was able to find these reviews: [1] [2] [3], only the first source gives enough analysis to be considered significant. Z1720 (talk) 02:24, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Keep The sources found by MarkH21 below, and the sources I have linked above are enough to satisfy WP:AUTHOR #3. Z1720 (talk) 21:14, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

• Delete Completely non-notable writer fails WP:NAUTHOR. If – by chance – the page is kept, it will need to be completely overhauled and re-written from scratch. KidAd talk
• Weak keep: In addition to the reviews found by Z1720 (which includes the Stuttgarter Zeitung), I also found this review from Der Tagesspiegel and another from Der Freitag with just enough coverage to probably be significant. The five reviews (why so many are from German daily newspapers, I don’t know) probably show that this barely passes WP:NAUTHOR#3. — MarkH₂₁^talk 07:45, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Thanks for searching for those, but the Freitag one looks like a different author to me--is there a different one you meant to link? Also, I'd note that these reviews don't include any independent biographical information, so the article would have to be severely shortened to be kept. blameless 18:07, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
    • @Blameless: The penultimate paragraph is 4 or so sentences solely about Les Edgerton & his book. I agree that the article would need a massive overhaul, but I do think these demonstrate notability. — MarkH₂₁^talk 19:16, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 20:07, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:12, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TheSandDoctor ^Talk 06:34, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.