Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Graham Spiers


 * 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. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 01:08, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Graham Spiers

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Seems to lack sufficient notability for BLP and the article is being used as a WP:COATRACK for disputed material about a football team. Colonel Warden (talk) 15:19, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * An editor is attempting to use the article as some form of soapbox for propaganda, with selective quotes from this journalist dug up from the past. I would agree to deletion if this is going to be the case.  Instead the article should include only material relevant to their notability, due to the fact that they are relatively unknown, as per WP:NPF. Monkeymanman (talk) 15:46, 15 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep Lacks notability? He is one of the most prominent journalists/sports writers in the country. Discuss content on the talk page. 90.200.240.178 (talk) 16:00, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Where are the independent sources which discuss him as a person, please? I had a look and couldn't find any. Colonel Warden (talk) 18:33, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I totally agree, that is the problem. He is a well-know sportswriter, but I don't see third party coverage of his work, which is clearly necessary for WP:N. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 22:18, 15 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Weak delete, very prominent football writer in Scotland, but I don't see much independent coverage of his writing to be honest. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 16:07, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. The notion that a journalist as prominent as Spiers has insufficient notability is plainly ludicrous. The quotes are not apparently selective unless it can be shown that they do not represent his views on the topic in question. I'm perfectly open to persuasion on this if it can be demonstrated. The fact that they may not cover the full breadth of his journalism only means that other material on his journalism ought to be added, not existing material removed. If you think these are views he held only in the past, you can listen to this programme broadcast only this week on Radio Scotland (if you are in the UK and until 12:02pm Wednesday 18th August 2010, according to the site). Mutt Lunker (talk) 16:23, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Strong keep Very prominent journalist in Scotland, frequent interviewee on Scottish television news programmes when discussing football matters. See for example the BBC describing him as the "award-winning sports journalist". Or for those not so Scottish attuned, The Today Programme. AllyD (talk) 18:57, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * These sources do not discuss our topic in detail - they merely announce that Graham Spiers was participating in a program. Colonel Warden (talk) 19:36, 15 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Strong keep This journalist is well known in Scotland. Scope_creep (talk) 20:05, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Do you have a source which verifies this, please?
 * How about leaving your name? The guy is really well known. There are pages and pages of ghits on the guy. How many sources do you need? scope_creep (talk) 23:28, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * We don't currently have any good sources so even one would be a start. Colonel Warden (talk) 09:55, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Strong Keep "Spiers has won Scotland's Sports Journalist of the Year award four times.[1]" and "In 2007, Random House published his book, L'Enigma - A Chronicle of Trauma and Turmoil at Rangers (ISBN 1-84596-291-5)" as well as his writing career and features on television. Freakshownerd (talk) 23:39, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions.  —AllyD (talk) 19:08, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The source for footnote [1] is promotional in nature, being Random House's puff for their own author. No credit is given and so it may have been written by the author himself.
 * Keep. He is a multiple-award winning journalist who writes for a national newspaper. Seems to meet the general notability guideline (i.e. his work has won significant critical attention) in my opinion.  Rockpock  e  t  13:44, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Again, these sources are not significant, detailed coverage of our subject. They are just lists of names in what seems to be an back-slapping event whose independence does not seem well-established. Colonel Warden (talk) 14:07, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thats fine, because they are not presented as evidence of "significant, detailed coverage of our subject". They are presented as reliable evidence that he is a multiple winner at the Scottish Press Awards (which you seemed to be doubting in your previous comment. And another thing, its generally not a good idea to rebutt every single !vote that you disagree with. You've expressed your opinion, let everyone else express theirs). Rockpock  e  t  14:35, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 * You had the goodness to present some sources and these seemed worthy of comment. This is a discussion, not a vote, and by such exchanges we may hope to arrive at consensus or, at least,  understand each others' point of view.  As for the sources, they seem adequate to support an article or list about the Scottish Press Awards but seem insufficient for a BLP as they provide little in the way of biographical detail.  As the awards themselves do not have an article here, their status and merit seems uncertain. Colonel Warden (talk) 14:47, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Since you bring up the issue of third party coverage: Spiers is among a number of prominant sports journalists interviewed and discussed in Sports journalism: context and issues, Raymond Boyle (2006). His football writing is also discussed (albeit more briefly) in Fear and loathing in world football, Gary Armstrong and Richard Giulianotti (2001) and Identities: global studies in culture and power, Volume 14 (2007). Rockpock  e  t  15:00, 16 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:15, 16 August 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.