Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Kipton Cronkite


 * 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. (The delete !vote was the first ever edit made by the user, Other than that clear keep.) (non-admin closure) – Davey 2010 Talk 14:48, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

James Kipton Cronkite

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:BLP of a socialite and entrepreneur, making no substantive claim of notability for either title — as written, this article just asserts that he exists, and then turns straight into a WP:COATRACK for his family genealogy instead of adding any substance to clarify why his existence would warrant the attention of an encyclopedia as of yet. And the volume of sourcing present isn't enough to get him over WP:GNG, either: once you exclude the user-generated referencing for the genealogy, two of the three remaining sources are local community publications of the type that would be acceptable for supplementary confirmation of facts after an article had already passed GNG, but are not widely distributed enough to be the GNG, and the one remaining source that is fully satisfactory toward the passage of GNG isn't substantive enough to get him over GNG by itself as the only GNG-compliant source. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 20:10, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. North America1000 14:41, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. North America1000 14:41, 17 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep – The subject passes WP:BASIC:, , , , . North America1000 14:47, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk  19:15, 20 January 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep Passes the GNG. Article's main problem is that it's a stub. Neonchameleon (talk) 12:23, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk  16:46, 27 January 2016 (UTC) Delete - nothing of news value or informational value here. Self promoting.
 * Keep. The sources cited by Northamerica substantiate Mr. Cronkite's notability, pursuant to WP:GNG. -- Notecardforfree (talk) 17:44, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep this lousy article even though page is an embarrassment to Wikipedia, because WP:GNG sourcing:.E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:09, 27 January 2016 (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.