Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthony F. McCloskey


 * 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. Cirt (talk) 07:06, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Anthony F. McCloskey

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

Well written article, but it does not appear that this person meets the inclusion criteria spelled out in WP:N. There are a smattering of claims about them, such as being cited by Gary Trudeau, but there does not appear to be many independent, reliable, and extensive sources to use as source material here. As such, this person does not meet the bare minimum notability requirements as spelled out at WP:N and WP:BIO Jayron32. talk . contribs 04:03, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:01, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Citations referencing Mr. McCloskey's selection to be included in Gary Trudeau's book have been updated. As well as his contributions to Slate.com, a popular contemporary online news source. --98.224.37.74 (talk) 22:22, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:00, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

I have seen McCloskey mentioned numerous times in the Philadelphia Inquirer, as well as several local Florida papers as well. I will try to find citations. Whereas he may be a minor figure in the scheme of things, but he is definitely a figure worth noting.--12.37.208.185 (talk) 00:20, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak delete   he was one of 4 bloggers selected by the NY Times for inclusion as representative--see  for the others. I would expect most inclusion elsewhere to be reprints. DGG (talk) 14:57, 13 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Does not appear to quite meet WP:BIO, or WP:BLP by not including WP:RS in a number of areas. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 00:22, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: certainly not notable for his military career, as there have been many other articles that have been deleted about individuals with more notable military careers (I guess this is a WP:OTHERCRAPDOESN'TEXIST argument, which is probably as invalid as WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS...) Thus the article needs to prove notability for his creative works. I will reserve judgement about this for the moment, while I hunt around and check the policy surrounding those areas. — AustralianRupert (talk) 02:18, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, no evidence that he clears the notability bar to qualify for a biographical article. His blog may be marginally notable, although I have my doubts here too per significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. EyeSerene talk 07:37, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Mr McCloskey seems to be admirable, but he doesn't meet WP:BIO as there's no evidence that much has been written about him. Nick-D (talk) 08:16, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. A fine American no doubt, but doesn't pass WP:BLPNiteshift36 (talk) 08:56, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: There are WP:BLP issues with this article as large sections are not referenced. Also, I do not believe that the subject qualifies as notable per WP:N or WP:CREATIVE. Clearly an interesting individual, but not necessarily one that meets the distinctive notability guidelines of Wikipedia. — AustralianRupert (talk) 04:16, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak delete. I'm conflicted on this one, but I'm not seeing a clear indication of notability.  His blog was the subject of posts on a number of other blogs (e.g., ), including some that pass WP:RS (e.g., ), but I don't think this enough; any blogger will attract some small amount of attention in the blogosphere, that's just the nature of things.  Searches for "Anthony McCloskey" in various news archives (such as LexisNexis) turn up only entries on other people.  Cool3 (talk) 04:58, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete first off he created his on article which to me instantly makes me abit doubtful. second off the IP address 98.224.37.74 i believe to be him as well because adding him to other relating articles is all that ip has ever done. and with references only being blogs makes it a very weak article and a possible fraud. I will say though that if verifable refernces are presented i will change my vote Fail Deadly (talk) 07:55, 17 June 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.