Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dylan Howard


 * 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: evidence of significant coverage in multiple third-party reliable sources has been provided (see Articles_for_deletion/Dylan_Howard), satisfying Wikipedia's general notability guideline. Additionally, most established users commenting after evidence of such coverage was provided at this AFD have favored retention of the article; the nominator has withdrawn the nomination. John254 14:51, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Dylan Howard

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

I think this does not meet WP:NN. Brusegadi 21:47, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, no obvious route to notability, no sources. --Dhartung | Talk 21:52, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per above.--Hooperbloob 00:17, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Don't Delete Understand above, but this article just needs to be cleaned up and more accurate and better sourced material added. This reporter deserves a page, due to his "notoriety" in his reporting.  We may not appreciate its content, but this reporter does have a place in Australia media history Bcollier 05:05, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - I tried looking for sources but failed. If you can find sources and meet WP:NN that would be fine.  Otheriwse, deletion and a future re-write are in order.  Brusegadi 06:04, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - Firstly, this article has to meet notoriety as a person not as a subject, see WP:BIO. As a "Creative Professional" / Journalist, Dylan has played a significant role in the "Illicit Drugs in the AFL" story, and what has happened over the last few days  has seen some of that vindicated.  His place in this should be noted! Bcollier 14:16, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - By WP:NN I mean WP:BIO since it is what applies here. The point is that the article does not establish notability by any of the guidelines mentioned in BIO.  Am i missing something?  Is he frequently cited?  If so, make it known!  As the article stands it only makes a vague mention of a sport's cheat, says the guy is controversial and does not really say why; and it may violate WP:BLP because it makes a claim about some guy being accused of cheating without providing reliable resources (I added ref tags for that)...  It seems messy and if it belongs, it probably needs to be rewritten.  Brusegadi 06:25, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - Granted Brusegadi the article isn't well written and needs some work. But until this AfD is resolved, it is pointless to work on the article especially if in 1 or 2 days time it is decided to delete this article.  I am happy to do the work, but just don't want to waste my time if the consensus is to delete.  Cheers Bcollier 13:53, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Delete and Redirect to Seven News. Notability of sportscasters is highly subjective. Cary Bass demandez 15:05, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - Firstly Bastique, this guy isn't a sportscaster, as the general definition of that term is "someone who commentates or calls a game for radio, TV or internet broadcasts". This guy is a journalist, and correct me if I am wrong, but we would have to delete alot of living person's bio's due to this reason.  This reporter has recently contributed quite alot to the debate surrounding illicit drug use in the AFL.  Some might argue this reporters methods, but there is no doubting his notoriety! Bcollier 08:02, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions.   -- the wub  "?!"  14:27, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - Although he may be a "journalist" and not a "sportscaster," that in itself doesn't assert notability. And nothing else does. &mdash;  Gig  gy  08:07, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - OK Giggy, but you know that this guy's story and its fallout is leading all the news bulletins and current affairs programs across all channel's including the ABC, Ch9 & Ch10. Plus he has been written up and his reports commented on in many national newspapers and has been given many column inches.  I can link all the articles here if you like, but would rather do it in the actual WP article.  I am not going to correct and fix the article until this "Delete"/"Don't Delete" issue is settled.  CHeers Bcollier 08:31, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

*Keep. His name is currently splashed all over the news in relation to a recent story in which he published the confidential medical records of two AFL players who have twice tested positive to recreational drugs. This is alleged by some to be a major breach of journalistic code of practice and ethics, and has resulted in an injunction against further publication, and a major rift between the AFLPA and Channel Seven, including threats of AFL players boycotting the Brownlow Medal. In short, this guy has both created, and himself become the subject of, back page news in Australia all this week. Surely that's notable enough. Hesperian 13:16, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Breaking news: The AFL have just announced that they will no longer deal with Howard because he claimed that they had approved his story. The Howard headlines continue to roll in.... Hesperian 06:35, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete with extreme prejudice. This guy is not notable, and never will be. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.68.178.83 (talk) 16:17, August 28, 2007 (UTC)  Note this editor has made only 4 edits over a 3 year period, though it may be an established editor who wasnt logged in. Gnangarra 15:40, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep. Agree with Hesperian that the current controversy and the coverage of his actions in this latest story probably make him notable enough for an article. My concern is where we can find reliable sources with enough information so that the article does not focus on this one issue alone and that the article complies with WP:BLP and WP:NPOV.  I fear this may be difficult. -- Mattinbgn\talk  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattinbgn (talk • contribs) 01:44, August 29, 2007 (UTC)
 * keep subject is a complex case, his story may be more notable in the short term than the person but atm neither a sufficiently distinguishable to be clearer as to what the stronger subject maybe. pure speculation on my part is his profession is more likely with time to establish separate notability. Either way there is enough notability it just needs time to establish the correct format/location for the article. Gnangarra 15:36, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * keep* whilst his actions and that of seven maybe questionable, it is still newsworthy!!!! who is requesting the deletion the afl or one of its friends???  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.248.37 (talk) 21:32, August 29, 2007 (UTC)  — 124.168.248.37 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * strong keep* The notability of the reporter is without question, in the same way Craig Hutchison is also attrubited to questionable journalistic practices. Redmulletfish —Preceding unsigned comment added by Redmulletfish (talk • contribs) 05:51, August 30, 2007 (UTC)  — Redmulletfish (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * TIME TO WRAP THIS UP - I think that there is enough evidence that this article is relevant and worthy of a place in WP and enough support above. Can we wrap this AfD up and get on with editing the article up to WP standards?  Cheers Bcollier 09:53, 30 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I GAVE UP!! - I have just completely reworked the article. Please review revised edition and comment!  Cheers Bcollier 16:58, 30 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep I've got no doubt the subject is notable enough. I believe that more information will come to light as the Medical Records scandal unfolds. The police are currently conducting an inquiry into this journalist. Don't delete the article. However, the article does need a clean-up. It needs better references, as various news reports have directly linked D.H to the scandal. So, this journalist is at the centre of a very big scandal, whichever way the police inquiry goes. The story, and the commentary about D.H is going to increase. Lester2 21:40, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Withdraw Nomination - The article has improved considerably so I will like to withdraw the nomination. Now it is a matter of providing a few links, but that is not enough reason for an Afd.  Thanks for all those who improved it, as I was unable to find info on the subject.  Good day, Brusegadi 03:35, 31 August 2007 (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.