Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ben Guild


 * 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 no consensus. Star  Mississippi  03:15, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Bernard Guild

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Non-notable writer. Pepper Beast   (talk)  23:02, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors,  and Alaska.   Pepper Beast    (talk)  23:02, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete No evidence of notability found and article is a promotional piece complete with a "maybe" book cover (LOL) and quote box. sixty nine   • whaddya want? •  17:32, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Entire article is WP:COPYVIO from here. Unless the author rewrites the article, removes all of the COPYVIO issues (including possible WP:IUP violation of the photo), and adds some more verifiable third-party sources of note, it should be deleted. It's me... Sallicio!$\color{Red} \oplus$ 01:35, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
 * @ Or Prabook copied it from us. Prabook is another collaborative encyclopedia that anyone can edit.4meter4 (talk) 15:39, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep Per 4meter4, and generally, I'm an inclusionist. It's me... Sallicio!$\color{Red} \oplus$ 16:19, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:26, 20 October 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:19, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. Passes WP:NAUTHOR with multiple independent reviews in RS of The Alaskan Mushroom Hunter's Guide (1977) and The Alaska Psychoactive Mushroom Handbook (1979). May also pass criteria 1 of Notability (academics) Google books has snippet views of reviews in several publications, including The Publishers Weekly - Volume 211 - Page 18, Pacific Search - Volume 12 - Page 27, Veterinary and Human Toxicology - Volume 23 - Page 68, etc. There are also many references which recommend these books or cite the books as an authoratitive resource if you look in google books. Appears to be significant publications that resulted from research conducted at the University of Washington that was funded by the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Institute of Health.4meter4 (talk) 15:39, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

*Very Weak Keep Since this person have some slight importance. But there's just not enough notability for him, literally. Pl or ek y Have a problem? 02:54, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
 * @Ploreky: "But there's just not enough notability for him, literally". This statement would be read by a closer as contradicting your stated !vote, and would probably result in them opting to discard your !vote, as they wouldn't be able to determine your actual intent.
 * To put it a different way, saying that there isnt enough notability is an unambiguous argument to delete. Combining that with a stated !vote of "Very Weak Keep" is contradictory. Mako001 (C) (T)  🇺🇦 12:14, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Okay, sorry, I just realized it. Thanks! Pl or ek y Have a problem? 05:36, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep Person is important, but gives very few proof of notability. But atleast satisfy WP:GNG. Might as well mark this as stub. Pl or ek y Have a problem? 05:39, 3 November 2022 (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.