Talk:John W. Loftus

Practricing
Does this article correctly assert that John W. Loftus is currently a minister? MaynardClark (talk) 22:14, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't think he is one. I think it's incorrect. —Approaching (talk) 19:02, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Notability
I'm concerned this biography runs into notability problems. It currently relies on four sources: I don't think this list of sources is nearly enough to warrant inclusion on Wikipedia, especially given the four seven years since the article was started.
 * A self-written biography at infidels.org
 * One book about deconversion
 * The results page of a search on penguinrandomhouse.ca (the reference erroneously refers to Loftus as a "staff writer"
 * A list of signatories of a "Pro-Truth Pledge"

The four sources themselves have problems. Assessing it by WP:GNG: Per WP:GNG guidelines, a subject that doesn't meet GNG criteria doesn't merit its own article. If it still has some verifiable facts, the article needs to be merged. But I can see no good candidate article to merge this BLP into.
 * The subject of the BLP lacks significant coverage: None of the sources address the subject directly and in detail. The second source is limited to discussing his religious (de)conversion. Likewise, every single one is a trivial mention except the second.
 * Only the second source is a secondary source.
 * The first source is not independent coverage, and is a primary source.

Assessing per people-specific notability criteria in WP:BASIC, the subject hasn't met basic notability criteria.
 * Subject has not received significant coverage.
 * The coverage in a published source is only about one event in their life.
 * There is only one such published source.

When assessing this BLP in the context of BLP-specific notability, problems also arise, according to WP:BLP1E
 * The subject of the article hasn't received significant coverage. Where he has been written about in a book, it has been limited to only one event in his own life: His shift in religious views.
 * This event is also covered in only one reliable source, so there is no persistence of coverage, and no multiplicity of reliable sources.

Because the subject is listed as an author, we can look at WP:AUTHOR, according to which, the subject doesn't fit any of the criteria.

Are there other existing sources that can be relied on? Any other criteria for notability I missed? I did some research, looking for more reliable sources, and cannot find much of anything that makes him relevant or noteworthy beyond being an author and a blogger. It doesn't seem likely that there is any out there. I invite others to help. Hopefully we can give the article sufficient time before moving on to WP:FAILN.

—Approaching (talk) 20:02, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree. There is very little indication that Loftus is notable, certainly the sources on the page give little indication of it.Strandvue (talk) 23:24, 23 October 2019 (UTC)