Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jack Melick


 * 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) Sulfurboy (talk) 07:19, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Jack Melick

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Notability is questionable. Dont seem to find much sources about his work or achievement online. Roy17 (talk) 19:35, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Roy17 (talk) 19:35, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:50, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete an oral history of the subject is a primary source. Wikipedia is supposed to be based on secondary not primary sources.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:17, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep as exercising WP:AGF in the article there are listed reliable sources offline newspaper articles directly about him such as The Japan Times, Nevada State Journal, Reno Evening Gazette and others which is enough to pass WP:GNG in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 23:57, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment. I found a brief mention of him in Texas Monthly. Although all of the sources cited in the article are offline sources, it appears that they were published by reputable media outlets (Billboard, Reno Evening Gazette, The Japan Times, etc). I'm not sure if all of these sources are independent of the subject but based on their titles, it looks like refs 4 through 7 might be independent of the subject.  Versace1608   Wanna Talk? 16:05, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep The scope and breadth of the sourcing meets the general notability guideline based on the references already in the article. Alansohn (talk) 01:41, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, buidhe 02:11, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep I'm assuming the newspaper refs are legit. Though the article should be trimmed substantially to focus on sourced content. ~ EDDY  ( talk / contribs )~ 16:11, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Keepappears to met GNG. Djflem (talk) 17:40, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak keep per the comments I made earlier. Some of the article's sources are notable and appear to be independent of the subject.  Versace1608   Wanna Talk? 21:04, 19 April 2020 (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.