Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brian M. Palmer (second nomination)


 * 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 —Quarl (talk) 2006-12-06 08:29Z 

Brian M. Palmer (second nomination)

 * (second nomination)

I came across this one by dumb luck. This article was given a very generous second chance eleven months ago by Deathphoenix, who closed it as no consensus (despite a 3-0 delete !vote) with the note "The result of the debate was No consensus, so keep (and cleanup). I am giving this article a chance to be cleaned up, but I have no objections to this article being AfDed at a later date if it doesn't get a better assertion of notability." Except for the addition of a single line and a spelling correction, it hasn't been touched since the first AfD was closed, so its time has come. NN, tagged as failing to assert notability since June and as needing cleanup since January without action. Aaron 03:50, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete I think Phaedriel's argument in the first AfD still applies here - hasn't really received enough notability within his own sphere. That, and a lack of verifiable external sources - a personal website is not the best reference. riana_dzasta 04:00, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Almost db-bio material... --- RockMFR 04:01, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. ^ demon [omg plz] 05:28, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. MER-C 05:34, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - Google suggests that he is a notable journalist, having interviewed a variety of notable figures, and being a notable contributor to a notable skateboarding magazine. In my opinion, he barely clears the notability bar.  Obviously, the article needs sources.  --Hyperbole 06:02, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, not many unique Google results, no WP:RS, fails WP:BIO. Connection to notable persons is not notability. --Dhartung | Talk 07:51, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Non-notable.  Interviewing notable people does not, in itself, confer notability.   Emeraude 12:02, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - per above commentaroy and nom. Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 14:14, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - please take a second look at this, not having heard of someone is not a good reason to delete. He is a journalist, and verifiably has work in published magazines. Trollderella 16:24, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Having published work does not by itself make a person notable. Being published merely means a person has succeeded in having a job. Authors and writers are not inherently notable. --- RockMFR 19:28, 30 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete I can't find anything that suggests he meets WP:BIO as an author or photographer.--Isotope23 16:37, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, as I have read some of his material before and consider him to be a semi-notable journalist. Sharkface217 20:25, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Fledgeling 22:33, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete: at the very least, more sources and a real assertion of notability are needed. Heimstern Läufer 03:16, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete The result of the last AfD discussion was keep with the note "I am giving this article a chance to be cleaned up, but I have no objections to this article being AfDed at a later date if it doesn't get a better assertion of notability." It has clearly failed that. There has been the addition of one sentence to the article since the last AfD was closed. No cleanup, no real assertion of notability. --Lijnema 12:48, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Had time, didn't clean up. Simonkoldyk 22:03, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Even the 'keepers' above admit to "semi-notable" and "barely notable". In other words, non-notable. DrKiernan 11:29, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Inadequately referenced, and ( in my view ) fails to cross the notability barrier. WMMartin 17:47, 5 December 2006 (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.