Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Street (2nd 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   keep. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:01, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Daniel Street
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Delete: A google news, scholar and lexisnexis search shows no major articles by the subject. Amandalu862 (talk) 15:36, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 12:56, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:06, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:36, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:37, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:37, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete: As per aboveAmandalu862 (talk) 20:31, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Keep, article passes WP:GNG. Lots of significant third-party coverage; also note the existence of the journalist's awards (including one presented by the Governor-General). Just because there is little coverage in the academic sphere does not necessarily mean that the subject is non-notable. 青い(Aoi) (talk) 09:18, 4 October 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:52, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Second relist rationale. The article is a BLP. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:52, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep per sources provided--good work, AOI. Drmies (talk) 03:46, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete No news articles about him through google search and academic search. How is this worthy compare to other newscasters? How can one even try to expand the page without any articles? There is no evidence he is a human rights campaigner. Please explain.Amandalu862 (talk) 21:40, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 * There are several sources that I've already added into the article that show that he is notable, having been presented with several prestigious awards. As to the "human rights campaigner" issue, if this bothers you and you can't find anything to back it up, either tag the comment or delete it yourself.
 * And finally, I'm sorry, but you only get one vote on the issue; you've already voted to delete this article three times (not including your votes in the previous AfD attempt). If you're going to comment on something, please mark your comments with comment and not delete. 青い(Aoi) (talk) 03:17, 6 October 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.