Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jody Alan Severns


 * 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. Can&#39;t sleep, clown will eat me 08:45, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Jody Alan Severns


This is a contested speedy deletion. Appears to be a self-created biography, but author claims to be notable. A quick search of Google turns up nothing, as does a less quick search of Lexis Nexis, but it's possible that there's been work in trade publications which such searches wouldn't reveal. If this gets kept it will need major wikification for tone and structure. Mackensen (talk) 14:29, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Really not enough here. 90% of the article is OR unverifiable biographical trivia. Main assertion of notability seems to be writing and editing a small magazine no one's ever heard of. Unspecified appearances in a few newspapers, even if verified, wouldn't confer notability unless author can be shown to be a significant featured writer or columnist. Staff writers and stringers are not notable. Fan-1967 15:11, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, once you get through all the unsourced, unverified biographical informatinon (that should be removed if this article is kept), what is left is a claim of notability based on writing/editing a magazine that has a circulation of about 9000 per issue. I think this falls well short of the WP:BIO criteria for inclusion.--Isotope23 15:57, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete unless someone bothers to source this article and do a proper cleanup (if there is ever one). - Mailer Diablo 17:30, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete. Trivial use of Wikipedia as a resume padding depot for family info, interests, etc, of subject lacking notability. Afv2006 18:47, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:V and WP:AUTO. We certainly don't want it. but it may be userfied if the author wants to keep it. ;-) Ohconfucius 06:32, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete with fire textdump. Danny Lilithborne 11:30, 23 November 2006 (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.