Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jim Lobe


 * 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. L Faraone  02:11, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Jim Lobe

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:BASIC, WP:ANYBIO, and WP:JOURNALIST. Plot Spoiler (talk) 04:17, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. — Mike  moral  ♪♫  09:28, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. — Mike  moral  ♪♫  09:28, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:13, 18 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep - Why would an article on Jim Lobe be considered not notable, when probably more than a thousand biographical wikipedia articles exist on far less notable figures? He has for thirty years been Washington DC bureau head of a highly respected international news agency. Perhaps hundreds of his articles have had very significant coverage, and been read and republished all over the internet for well over a decade. He's got archives of articles on several popular news sites, including Lew Rockwell, Alternet, and Common Dreams. He's been interviewed more than once by global television channels for his expertise. He has a successful blog-site that is linked into by several hundred other web sites, and is followed on social media by thousands of people. I think this clearly means that a wikipedia article on Jim Lobe would meet notability guidelines WP:GNG. D Dayus (talk) 00:03, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
 * There are undoubtably more than a thousand other articles that should be deleted, but this discussion is about this article, not those other articles. If you want this article to be kept then you need to provide evidence that Jim Lobe has been the subject of significant coverage in independent reliable sources. It's not enough to assert that claim without providing the evidence. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:13, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Just as well, then, that I did mention that his works have had very significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Try doing a search. You'll see that my mention of those three significant reliable independent sources is just a start. Would you like me to do the search, and report the results? Or is it significant enough to mention that, of the 234,000 results on Google, the first few pages of results include references to him and his work by significant, independent, and long-standing sources, such as Inter Press Service, Alternet, AntiWar.com, Aljazeera, Common Dreams, Z Communications, Open Society Foundations, and The Nation. Or is it a policy of wikipedia that an author who has had his work published for decades in significant reliable independent sources, and republished widely elsewhere, and who is bureau chief at an internationally significant news agency office in the capital city of the only global superpower, and whose work has been influential in covering the politics of the said superpower, is only notable if someone else writes something about him? D Dayus (talk) 22:20, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, that is Wikipedia policy, and yes, please do the search and report what you find about Lobe in independent reliable sources. Publications that he writes for are by definition not independent, and in those first few pages of search results and in the sources that you list I can only find stuff by Lobe, not about him. Phil Bridger (talk) 07:09, 22 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment: I added some fresh sources because I believe he is important, but more have to be entered to save the article. In the databases, he's written quite a bit himself. He's also referred to by other writers at a much higher rate than you'll find with other journalists. While he gives interviews, I haven't yet found one where he speaks about bio details. He is always the expert. Crtew (talk) 13:05, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar   &middot;   &middot;  05:28, 24 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep Lobe is an award winning journalist who is cited again and again by his peers, and therefore he meets the basic requirements of WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. His organization is different from the mainstream media and this accounts for some of the differences between himself and other journalists. Crtew (talk) 23:05, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Which notable peers cite him again and again? Thanks. Plot Spoiler (talk) 03:01, 29 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar   &middot;   &middot;  16:13, 1 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep for I believe that notibility is established. I also think that if you want to improve a journalist article, I would recommend notability in order to reach the nobility guidelines; I say it is a pretty good article. WisconsinBoyClevelandRocks228844 (talk) 02:49, 2 July 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.