Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James West (Australian journalist)


 * 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   no consensus. This discussion received little attention after relisting; no prejudice against renomination if desired. Xymmax So let it be written   So let it be done  20:47, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

James West (Australian journalist)

 * – ( View AfD View log ) •

Author of one little-known book. Clearly fails WP:AUTHOR. Adpete (talk) 08:54, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  -- Jclemens-public (talk) 00:21, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  --  Bduke    (Discussion)  02:50, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:AUTHOR and WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 11:07, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep his recent press from his youtube campaign makes him notable. westius (talk) 11:07, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * see WP:RECENT. recent coverage should not bias notability. LibStar (talk) 13:06, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree with Libstar. It was a "human interest" story rather than real news, and coverage wasn't very widespread (about 15-20 hits total on Google news). Merely being in the news doesn't make one notable. Adpete (talk) 03:21, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:33, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Keep - He's received significant and ongoing press coverage in relation to the book (can provide sources if disputed) (WP:AUTHOR guideline 4, significant critical attention) but he's also notable for his contribution generally to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation and the Special Broadcasting Service, as covered in Meanjin (here) and his appearance at this conference. Most importantly, he meets the general notability guidelines of "significant coverage in reliable independent sources", and that's the final arbiter of the matter. - DustFormsWords (talk) 02:26, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I see publicity blurbs and a couple of blog reviews, but I found only one mainstream review of the book, in the Otago Daily Times, and one fleeting mention in The Age. He has been on radio but that's a long way short of WP:ENT . WP:N says, ""Significant coverage" means that sources address the subject directly in detail" and I don't see that. Adpete (talk) 11:52, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:03, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * 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.