Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Felton Keith


 * 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   delete. Tone 19:12, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

James Felton Keith

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

This author fails WP:AUTHOR and WP:N /BIO. There are no unaffiliated reliable sources in the article and I can find none in Google news or elsewhere. In removing the prod I placed on this article, the creator of the article noted this is a "relatively new author". Too new to be notable for Wikipedia purposes, I suggest. Novaseminary (talk) 17:07, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. The lack of reliable secondary sources brings the subject's notability into question. Uncle Dick (talk) 17:37, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Can't find reliable source at all. scope_creep (talk) 19:42, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:47, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:48, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. I also cannot find any reliable sources for this individual. Zero hits on Google Scholar for "James Felton Keith". Also note that his only currently published book, Intergrationalism, is self-published. The publisher, Think Enxit Press, is a company founded by Keith.
 * Delete, no reliable sources indicating notability. Indeed, there's quite a bit of puffery, for lack of a better term; the article makes it difficult to figure out what the claim of notability even is. -- Kinu t /c  08:13, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. He has, according to the article, published a couple of magazine articles and founded a couple of small companies; that's not enough. And almost none of the article is supportable by reliable sources. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:37, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - Per David Eppstein. Joaquin008  ( talk ) 13:05, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Dont Delete I've recently looked at other profiles for authors pages and their like Alfie Kohn and Daniel Pink and they dont have reference points without ties to their publishing. Maybe some of the language like academic should be removed, but is current working as a researcher and student. And I dont think that how he paid for his books printing has anything to do with its validity. It is recommended reading in my upcoming Ecology course on People and Environment. This author is young, so how many old recommendations does he need to be deemed valuable enough for a wiki? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.206.110.180 (talk) 18:41, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Not that other stuff exists is ever very compelling, of those two authors, one had a book on the NY Times bestseller list and the other received coverage in major newspapers. For more on how authors become notable, read WP:AUTHOR, and for academics, read WP:ACADEMIC. This author does not even come close to meeting either. (And here is more on  how to contribute to a deletion discussion in case you are interested. Novaseminary (talk) 18:51, 30 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.