Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Fulton (researcher)


 * 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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 01:14, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

James Fulton (researcher)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Fails WP:PERSON.

The result of a 22 Dec '08 merge of James Fulton (researcher) (started on 4 Sep '08 by [fl. 2008–2012], as JamesFulton) and James T. Fulton (started on 8 Sep '08 by Steamboat Jim, as James T Fulton). Both the first version of "James T Fulton" and that of "JamesFulton" look less like an article, more like a user page.

After 12 years, still lacking any link from any other article.

Prodded by ; prod removed by with the edit summary "there were sources on the article when the BLPPROD was added that verify information in the article": I don't notice any such sources other than those created by Fulton himself; but anyway, the prod was removed.

Looks in Google for in combination with any of  /  /  /  /  /  brings something of a walled garden of Fulton's PDFs and websites, commercial scrapes of Wikipedia, and so forth. I don't notice anything else. This is hardly surprising, as his books were published by "Trafford Press" (about which, see this). Whether or not Fulton's ideas have merit, we lack reliable, independent sources about them. -- Hoary (talk) 23:42, 9 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. Hoary (talk) 00:01, 10 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete. No evidence of notability, and no proper references.-Arch dude (talk) 01:46, 10 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete. I agree entirely with Arch dude. I would go further: there is some evidence within the article itself that he is not notable. Spinney Hill (talk) 09:58, 10 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete - Not notable; no proper sourcing; cannot find decent coverage. FWIW the item was 'prodded' by Shantavira not ONUnicorn and as for removal of the prod was not at all sure what sources were referred to either (although BLPPROD does say sources in *any* form). As it was a BLPPROD a 'standard' PROD could have been a possibility. Eagleash (talk) 14:15, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete (Actually, the prod was by, I just endorsed it.) I do not consider the links in the article to be sources, as they are not cited as such and do not constitute reliable sources as Wikipedia defines it. A person's own self published books, website, and articles are not sources about that person for their biography.  I can find material by him, but I cannot find material about him.  Thus we cannot support an article about him. ~  ONUnicorn (Talk&#124;Contribs) problem solving 16:42, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete does not meet our inclusion criteria for either academics or writers.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:26, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. Does not pass WP:NACADEMIC. The current sourcing leads to articles published by the subject, not about the subject. --Kbabej (talk) 22:58, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete ca't anything that suggests he's notable -- Devoke water  13:13, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete There's not much to add, article doesn't seem to pass WP:PERSON. Overall, coverage of the person is very lousy. - 𓋹 𝓩𝓲𝓪𝓭 𝓡𝓪𝓼𝓱𝓪𝓭 𓋹 [user |  talk] 15:01, 16 March 2021 (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.