Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jason Leech


 * 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. The arguments for keeping are not based on policy  DGG ( talk ) 17:23, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Jason Leech

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

First off, I am disgusted that this article passed the AfC, let alone notability. It is atrociously written, contains one formatted reference out of twenty-three and doesn't begin to use them until section two. It looks like the writer wrote the first two sections, got given a message about how to use references and wrote the next few sections a learned user.

Secondly, most of the references are passing mentions. Those that are not are primary sources. The only one that isn't is a link to his The Apprentice profile.

Thirdly, notability; doesn't exist. Fails WP:1EVENT. Monyaka is a lot more notable than this and it failed AfC three times.

Notifications:,. Laun chba  ller  21:29, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2013 June 12.  Snotbot   t &bull; c &raquo;  21:49, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:00, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:00, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:01, 13 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Redirect to List of The Apprentice candidates (UK series nine). Coverage is insubstantial or just quotes from him. -- Whpq (talk) 15:24, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Weak, Weak keep: The question of notability is hard to find but I think under GNG there is enough due to his involvement in the schools thing. However the article needs a very thorough re-write as it is currently worded in a very POV way and that needs to be addressed ASAP if it survives this.  The C of E God Save the Queen!  ( talk ) 16:56, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment - Can you point out the significant coverage about Leech that was generated from that school thing? -- Whpq (talk) 18:39, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry guys, I've been off Wikipedia for a while, and I accept what other users say. I failed on this article as a AfC reviewer. Is there some sort of acception review (like a move review on WP:RM) Sorry, jcc (tea and biscuits) 18:18, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Honestly, I'd move it back to AfC.-- Laun  chba  ller  23:20, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll await someone to do that then. I'll be back on my Wikibreak, so would appreciate someone leaving a notice on my talk page or giving me a notification. jcc (tea and biscuits) 07:48, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Do I really have to wait to do this or can I short-circuit the process under WP:SNOWBALL?-- Laun  chba  ller  09:50, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Just searching 'Jason Leech' through google instantly confirms the serious notability of this subject and the progressively greater interest there is in him. It does not make sense to delete the article. The article isn't great and could benefit from an experienced wikipedia editor bringing the structure up to standard, but it is nevertheless a good start which will doubtlessly be improved as more traffic passes through the page. I recommend that you keep and improve the page. User: Kounelara 14:56, 16 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I knew I should've short-circuited this... anyway, in its current form it shouldn't be on the site regardless of notability. I would suggest bunging it back into AfCspace and getting a reviewer to deal with it.-- Laun  chba  ller  14:54, 16 June 2013 (UTC)


 * OK - I promise to work on this at the end of this week and make the article more robust. I know the subject and can source more references. In the meanwhile, though, I would like to state, for the record, that although Launchballer is clearly acting with broadly noble intentions for the benefit of improving Wikipedia, he acts as if it's his private fiefdom and his language and attitude throughout has been very abrasive and denigrating towards other users and very unhelpful. Kounelara - 00:21, 17 June 2013
 * An AfC lasts a week, so you'd have about three days before it gets moved.-- Laun  chba  ller  23:38, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Redirect as above to List of The Apprentice candidates (UK series nine). This is basically a CV, not an article. The "school thing" is locally worthy but not in itself anything like notability-conferring - IMO. Jsmith1000 (talk) 16:19, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm unclear whether the effect of the above is to suspend this from the AfD process until re-written / sourced / re-sprayed at AfC, but unless this man has a whole other life not hinted at in this article (or, implausibly but not impossibly, won the series):
 * Delete (or redirect) -- We have a vast amount of poppy about a career that has barely begun. Clearly still NN.  Peterkingiron (talk) 17:56, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I have this strange tugging feeling that Jason Leech actually wrote this article himself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Silvabane (talk • contribs) 22:59, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * You may well be right, however I tend to take all users on face value. I'd be more inclined to accuse the IP that created this discussion's talk page of being Leech.-- Laun  chba  ller  23:22, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Whatever the problems with this article it is very useful as an insight into Jason Leech and if we are all looking it up surely it is doing its job. Keep it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.146.23.149 (talk) 00:22, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

I agree with the above writer - it does give an insight into Jason Leech, and I would be sorry to see it removed, as he has many family attachments that are of interest.
 * Very co-incidental that two IPs appear out of nowhere, respond within a matter of hours of each other, use the same formal language and make similar errors. Silvabane's only edit is to here, as well. Co-incidence much?-- Laun  chba  ller  09:39, 20 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment: Here it looks to me like there is no consensus as there appears to be no clear decision on what to do. I would recommend a closure as no consensus and then stick a load of clean-up templates on it or give it to the copy-editors guild as an urgent case.  The C of E God Save the Queen!  ( talk ) 09:35, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment - if you disregard the instant accounts and IP addresses, there is a clear consensus to redirect - it is only you who wants to keep it. This man is not (yet) notable. Jsmith1000 (talk) 10:51, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Redirect as above to List of The Apprentice candidates (UK series nine). This is just a resumé at present. I suspect he will become notable, but he hasn't got there yet. He is still at "Warhol's 15 minutes" stage. JMcC (talk) 11:19, 20 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete -- It is incredibly obvious that Leech himself wrote this article. The writing contains quite a lot of distinctive phrases that Leech used a lot when appearing on the Apprentice. I also would imagine that the minutiae of his family history must, before it was written on here, have only been known to Leech and his own family, simply because no one else could possibly care. This is a vanity page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.244.15.236 (talk)
 * Comment - It was in fact himself who created the article, the source being his personal academia page where he references the page http://kcl.academia.edu/JasonLeech. --Silvabane (talk) 15:48, 20 June 2013 (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.