Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eric Greitens


 * 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. Consensus is for the article to be retained. North America1000 01:54, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Eric Greitens

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

part of a promotional campaign for the subject, and his works and associates. Probably notable, but would need rewriting from scratch. The military career may be notable: nothing else is. the article would need to be completely rewritten from scratch. The large number of miscellaneous awards show nothing much. The politics section may be the key to this group of articles.  DGG ( talk ) 01:52, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment This definitely appears to be a concerted effort to get some Wikipedia coverage for he and his wife (who appears in the adjascent AfD as Sheen Grietens). Eric has a slew of Google news mentions, does this not make him notable, or is it a case of WP:BLP1E?
 * Keep. The promotional aspect of this wanted to make me say delete.  But his books "Resilience: Hard-Won Wisdom for Living a Better Life" and "The Heart and the Fist" both pass WP:BKCRIT #1 and with two arguably books under his belt, I think he's going to qualify as notable himself.  I think the best solution for minimizing cruft is going to be to merge all his books and his wife's article into one article.--Samuel J. Howard (talk) 03:10, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Obvious keep - he's running for governor of Missouri, author of two books, called upon by national press for commentary, head of a foundation. Folks need somewhere to look this stuff up, and Wikipedia/Google will be their first stop. That said, I have no objection to a complete re-write. Rklawton (talk) 03:52, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  07:15, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  07:15, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Missouri-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  07:15, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Comment The principal objection here is not notability but promotion. Lack of notability is not the only reason for deletion. Borderline notability combined with clear promotionalism is an equally good reason. Small variations to the notability standard either way do not fundamentally harm the encycopedia, but accepting articles that are part of a promotional campaign causes great damage. Once we become a vehicle for promotion, we're useless as an encycopedia. But as for notability, it's well established that just running for Governor is not notability--he needs to win the election. Whether this is promoting his political campaign or his books we need not determine.  DGG ( talk ) 18:31, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep simply for the presidential campaign so we'll see where the article goes from there. SwisterTwister   talk  07:16, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment - a vast majority of the deletions for Greitens, his books, organization and wife seem to be a bit premature without any due diligence. With all due respect to DGG, but to say that the Mission Continues has no notable sources and then Samuel J. Howard cites coverage by seemingly every major news organization is doing a disservice to all users who visit that page with a huge "Deletion" box at the top and therefore do not trust the material (watch the Daily Show with Jon Stewart who gushes over the work of the Mission Continues or Tom Brokaw's piece on the non-profit for Nightly News - I mean, how much more mainstream do you get?). Additionally, a vast majority of these articles were originally written in 2008 by Benchmark.stl, so to say that they are in response to running for Governor in 2015 as a "promotional campaign" is rather misconceived. --Chad.huber (talk) 08:26, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. He is notable as per WP:AUTHOR. TeriEmbrey (talk) 18:10, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:06, 2 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment I just re-read the article. It's not promotional. It lists Grietens' achievements as it should, and it doesn't contain any puffery. So far as I can tell, the nomination for deletion is entirely baseless. Rklawton (talk) 18:54, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment - "In 2014, Fortune Magazine featured Greitens as one of the World's 50 Greatest Leaders.[50] On April 18, 2013, Time magazine named Greitens to its 2013 one hundred Most Influential People in the World.[2]" - these seem pretty notable to me. Also - "He was selected to represent the city of St. Louis and the Cardinals at the 2010 All-Star Game in Anaheim, California.[53][54]" - seems like a big deal baseball-wise.  Not sure about this stuff though - "Greitens is an accomplished marathon runner who has also won gold medals in taekwondo and boxing.[56] Greitens was honored with the HOOAH Award, commissioned by the Major George A. Smith Memorial Fund in 2009.[57] Greitens was named the 2010 Reader of the Year by Outside magazine.[58]  Greitens has appeared on NBC Nightly News,[59] the Today Show,[60] the Colbert Report,[61] and The Daily Show."  But with the article's present book reviews and these three I just found in a couple of minutes:  - LA Times Review: 'The Warrior's Heart' gives a Navy SEAL's life lessons,  - NY Times Acts of Valor and  - Kirkus Reviews star review The Warrior's Heart, this guy is a Keep as he easily meets WP:GNG and may I also suggest WP:AUTHOR.Coolabahapple (talk) 16:19, 3 October 2015 (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.