Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Francis Heaney


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:28, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Francis Heaney

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Completing unfinished nomination for another user, Twinkle apparently hiccuped. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Many otters • One hammer • HELP) 22:23, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Was trying to ix it by hand by TenPoundHammer beat me to it. Deletion reason (second try, the one I typed into TWINKLE was longer and more detailed) wad: "No sources at all given, let alone the multiple independent non-trivial reliable sources establishing notability that are required. Tagged since Aug. 2008 with no improvement. Nothing in the bio given here suggests enough notability for a Wikipedia article." DreamGuy (talk) 22:25, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.  -- — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  02:52, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  -- — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  02:52, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable. See . ChildofMidnight (talk) 04:46, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * And what there do you think demonstrate notability per Wikipedia standards for an article? DreamGuy (talk) 15:03, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep This page has existed for more than 4 years and been edited by 17 different Wikipedians, not counting (I'm assuming from the name) Francis Heaney himself. Suddenly he's not notable? Personally, I'd like to see all published puzzle constructors with a significant number of credits in Wikipedia. Francis certainly meets this criteria. While we don't see his name in the newspaper much, Amazon lists ~50 puzzle books that he is an author or co-author of. I think the best statement is the one made by User:DreamGuy in August 2007, when he removed a notability tag.
 * "being a former editor at GAMES mag is quite notable all by itself"
 * Note: As a fellow member of the NPL, I know Francis personally, but I have not edited this page. Co-nominator DreamGuy (who has now reversed himself) claims to be a member of the NPL, so he probably knows Francis personally as well.
 * RoyLeban (talk) 08:26, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * It's not a question of suddenly not being notable, the article never demonstrated any notability and I gave it almost a year to demonstrate notability. The "former editor" line was when I mistakenly thought it was editor editor, like main editor. "Editor at large" is one of several nonnotable inferior positions. DreamGuy (talk) 15:03, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep When I stuck his name and that of the tournament in Google, I was immediately able to confirm the last line. If making the top 3 of a major tournament is notable for sportspeople in physical sports I see no reason to not do the same for brainsports. - Mgm|(talk) 11:05, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Evidently notable. I have added a citation. Colonel Warden (talk) 00:13, 4 May 2009 (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.