Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Craig Weatherhill


 * 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. WP:SOFTDELETE KTC (talk) 00:08, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Craig Weatherhill

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unable to verify notability. After looking for sources and cleaning this up in Dec 2010, I placed some "citation needed" requests: these remained unfulfilled for a year, so in Jan '12 I removed the flagged content and requested citations for some of what remained. Those requests are still unsatisfied after another year. I've now tried three times without success to find independent reliable sources for Weatherhill. Sure, his books have been reviewed, and he gives interviews and gets mentions in the local media etc., but I can't find anything of the quality required to satisfy Notability (people). It's either time for someone else to do some work to show that this is worth keeping, or it's time for it to go. —S MALL JIM   23:43, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment. Genuinely not sure about this (as my last edit summary suggested). Within the small world of fringe Cornish nationalism, he seems to be quite a prominent personality, relatively speaking. He's also a published author of both non-fiction and fiction, with quite a few books to his name. However, he does not have any real profile as an activist in the wider world; plus he's very much an "amateur" historian by the look of it and most of his books, of whatever sort, seem to come out on fairly obscure imprints (although not self-published). As ever it's down to what prominence he has in reliable sources, which seems minimal. Even if the page survives, all the cn-tagged content needs to be struck, especially all the promotional stuff about him being "considered one of Cornwall's foremost experts" (which then may leave us with little more than a stub).  N-HH   talk / edits  10:51, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:40, 15 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 01:02, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Theopolisme   ( talk )  00:36, 27 January 2013 (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.