Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Don Swaim


 * 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. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  11:41, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Don Swaim

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Delete. Nine years after a prod, there are still no sources to indicate this person is anything more than a guy with a job, and therefore does not meet the notability requirements of WP:NBIO. UnitedStatesian (talk) 13:54, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete Not seeing the significant reliable source coverage to show that he meets WP:ANYBIO, WP:JOURNALIST, or WP:NAUTHOR. PohranicniStraze (talk) 15:14, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:43, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:43, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:43, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:43, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:45, 30 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete a non-notable journalist.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:32, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. Neither radio journalists nor writers get an automatic inclusion freebie just because they and their work exist, but the external links present here are not helping to establish his notability at al. They all represent verification of his status as a creator of coverage about other things, where the actual notability test is his status as the subject of reliable source coverage written and published by other people. Bearcat (talk) 21:28, 3 November 2018 (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.