Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Albert Coe


 * 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. StarM 22:47, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Albert Coe

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Fails WP:BIO. Publisher of one non-notable book. Claim to fame within the paranormal community seems to be that he was the first contactee. However, that doesn't make him article-worthy. Could not find any reliable third-party sources that documented is encyclopedia-worthiness. Perhaps a WP:ONEEVENT persona as well? ScienceApologist (talk) 05:27, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete per nom. (Hope I'm not abducted by aliens for this vote.) -- R andom H umanoid ( &rArr; ) 06:09, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - Article fails WP:BIO.  Matt  (  Talk  )   07:16, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Paranormal-related deletion discussions.   —Artw (talk) 09:02, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - I am swayed by the thought that this person verifiably claims to have been the first ever person to have been abducted by aliens. The first alien abduction story came in 1961, 8 years before the publication of this book. So he was a pioneer. - Richard Cavell (talk) 12:54, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * That's nothing, I was abducted by aliens in 1937. Protonk (talk) 04:40, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, the article contains no sources independent of the subject that establish notability. Tim Vickers (talk) 16:09, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - RichardCavell's argument that 8 years after alien abduction fantasies proved publishable, some other guy came forward to cash in, therefore he's for real, is not reasonable to me, and the article makes no actual assertion of notability beyond the subject's own claims. I don't agree with the WP:ONEEVENT suggestion in the rationale for deletion, however, as being first at a notable thing is often notable. However, in this case the article fails to substantiate the firstness as well. ThuranX (talk) 16:39, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * delete per Thuranx. JoshuaZ (talk) 17:40, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete in the absence of the reliably published third-party sources about Coe that would allow him to pass WP:BIO. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:00, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete: Doesn't show notability per WP:BIO. Schuy m 1  ( talk ) 19:47, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:BIO and WP:N. Edison (talk) 23:24, 31 December 2008 (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.