Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adam Dread


 * 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   keep. Cirt (talk) 10:58, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Adam Dread

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Article has been proposed for deletion 3 times in the past. The last two proposed deletions were procedurally removed due to the initial objection.

Ignoring the overall style and tone of the article, which reads something like a trophy shelf, I'm not convinced that the subject of the article is notable. Google results are slim and (apart from the usual facebook and linkedin results) are almost entirely focused on the Nashville/Tennessee area.

Additionally, I haven't spent time checking out all of the claimed facts, but as a start, this "published book author" has a volume with this level of popularity on Amazon:, and almost non-existent ghits besides.  Mae din \talk 13:24, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - Seems to be fairly notable, more so than many city councilmen who have unchallenged Wikipedia pages. Article contains way too much puffery but should be edited, not deleted. --MelanieN (talk) 15:28, 2 December 2009 (UTC)MelanieN
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:48, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Tennessee-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:48, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Sources being local is insufficient reason for deletion. This could be improved by editing out any hyperboles. Sources clearly exist. I wouldn't call him a published author though. With this sort of Amazon rank, he's barely selling a single copy. - Mgm|(talk) 10:39, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - There appears to be significant coverage of this person. The article has some serious POV issues but that just means someone needs to go through and clean it up. There are plenty of in-depth articles about the man and his various achievements. I've added a couple of citations, quotes from the citations can be found here. They're not enough to claim notability on their own, but they give a sense of the type of coverage this man has. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 15:52, 3 December 2009 (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.