Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andy Budd


 * 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. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 19:11, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Andy Budd

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

This person is not notable. He is just a Creative Director of a non-notable company in the UK. Furthermore, simply being a published author does not automatically entail notability (in this instance, neither listed book is notable either). This article is an orphan because no other pages would link to it since it's trivial and not Wikipedia worthy. Jrcla2 19:40, 28 June 2009 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:03, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak delete--weak, since there is a bit of coverage (not incorporated into the article), though not enough, in my opinion, to warrant inclusion. Budd is cited twice in an article in The Independent, and is cited as an expert in a brief article on Web 2.0, on the PopSci website. Not enough, though, and they don't amount to in-depth discussion of our subject, as WP:N requires us to find. Drmies (talk) 20:42, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:00, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Keep Evidently notable commentator. Colonel Warden (talk) 21:36, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 * "Evidently"? What evidence is there for that? --Calton | Talk 02:18, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:20, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete No evidence of any real impact aside from weasel-wording. --Calton | Talk 02:18, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Evidently non-notable. (if that is sufficient for a keep...) Niteshift36 (talk) 04:57, 12 July 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.