Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A. Shahid Stover


 * 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   delete. Courcelles 00:13, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

A. Shahid Stover

 * – ( View AfD View log )

A restored speedy deletion which doesn't seem to assert notability: writing a few articles and running a blog, so requesting input from a wider audience. Stephen 00:24, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - notability doesn't seem to have been met. Also note that the article's author is mostly interested in adding this book to other Wikipedia articles, suggesting possible promotion and/or conflict of interest issues. ClovisPt (talk) 00:41, 9 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:44, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- -- Cirt (talk) 08:34, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Stephen, the subject "A. Shahid Stover" meets the notability requirement because of THE BOOK HE WROTE, which you either accidentally or deliberately failed to mention. If it was only the articles and the blog I'd agree with you otherwise. -Cain —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.249.214.224 (talk) 23:15, 9 December 2010 (UTC)


 * KEEP THE ARTICLE!!! The notability of the "A. Shahid Stover" article I wrote is self-evident.  How many philosophical works on Hip Hop exist?  Exactly.  C'mon, this feels like a debate under false pretenses.  I suspect the issue is more POV than Stephen is letting on, his concerns seem a bit trite really.  Clovis makes a good point though I have been "mostly interested"(nice slight there buddy) in including what I consider a great book about Hip Hop into other relevant Wikipedia articles.  That is what Wikipedia is about though right, contributing to "a free encyclopedia ... in terms of breadth and in terms of depth".  The article I wrote about "A. Shahid Stover" contributes to both, period.  I'm sure Stephen isn't into Hip Hop or critical theory, but that doesn't mean that articles which would interest those who don't look, talk or have the same interests as Stephen should be deleted on some bogus pretentious claims of somehow lacking notability.Anotsu9 (talk) 02:05, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

 — 71.249.214.224 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 01:03, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, given that there have been no further edits over the time listed to assert notability. --Stephen 05:49, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
 * DO NOT DELETE, "further edits" were never a condition for "asserting notability". I agree with Anotsu9 who claimed the "notability" of his article is "self-evident". -Cain  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.249.214.224 (talk) 18:28, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * KEEP THE ARTICLE part II Look, I wrote an article about a man who is a radical intellectual, a philosopher and a social critic.  I'm not claiming he is world famous pop star or a state sanctioned academic bureaucrat.  What I am claiming is that by writing the book, HIP HOP INTELLECTUAL RESISTANCE, he has achieved that ever elusive quality of NOTABILITY.  Stephen disagrees, but again, I think Stephen has other less objective reasons for eliminating my "A. Shahid Stover" article.Anotsu9 (talk) 04:30, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Please don't !vote more than once, if you wish to add further comments, simply put "comment" at the start rather than putting "keep" again. Thank you -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:23, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Zero gNews archive hits. Lack of RSs means the subject fails WP:BIO / WP:AUTHOR / WP:GNG. Novaseminary (talk) 05:39, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete for lack of documented notability. I appreciate that the subject may seem notable, and may even be somewhat notable in fact, but we must have sources that show this notability for it to count on Wikipedia. The article was nominated for deletion on 9 December; it's now the 21st and no edits have been made to the article adding sources (or, indeed, any information). No, you do not have to add sources to have an AFD closed as keep - but you do need to show that the nominator's concern is unwarranted, and that hasn't happened here. So, delete. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 15:17, 21 December 2010 (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.