Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bartley Gorman


 * 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. Courcelles 17:46, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Bartley Gorman

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

there are hardly any facts on the page, simply conjecture and hearsay. I pointed this out months ago. But the page still hasn't been improved Doktordoris (talk) 22:33, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep This article needs to be trimmed to a stub but it is notable Gnevin (talk) 00:20, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:40, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. WP:BEFORE please - 30 seconds on Google should be enough to confirm notability.--Michig (talk) 06:16, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Several reliable sources on Google, notable person. Although I agree the article may need some expansion. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 07:36, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. I'm expanding the article and adding references now. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 10:54, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, there's 5 reliable sources in there now, also there's info about a book on him and a film directed by Shane Meadows in the pipeline which I'm about to add to the article. More than enough to satisfy notability guidelines. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 12:13, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Make that 9 reliable sources...withdrawal of nomination would be good ;-) Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 12:37, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep Thanks to Dylanfrom's excellent work! VASterling (talk) 15:16, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 12:55, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

As it was a malformed nomination it'll run til the 28th, unless anyone wants to close it as a snow keep. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 06:47, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notable, reliably sourced: due to addition of valid, appropriate, notably sourced, reliably sourced, verifiable, properly formatted citations, and copyediting for straightforward prose. So, closed in seven days from the 21st, or the 11th? Anybody know?--Lexein (talk) 04:52, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks -Lexein (talk) 13:45, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I would be happy to, although I have already said my opinion on this article, it might not be a good idea. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:21, 25 September 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.