Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John C. Maxwell


 * 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 as per unanimous consensus and no calls for deletion beyond the nominator. Furthermore, Mr. Maxwell is a prolific best-selling author who more than passes WP:GNG requirements, which should cancel the article's inclusion for a deletion debate. A non-admin closure. And Adoil Descended (talk) 12:40, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

John C. Maxwell

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Had a look at the sources and did an online search. Not finding independent in-depth coverage about Maxwell or any of his books in reliable sources - lack of WP:SIGCOV. Fails WP:GNG. Edwardx (talk) 20:18, 19 March 2018 (UTC) Edwardx (talk) 20:18, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Snow Keep New York Times Best Selling Authors always seem to generate enough third party press to warrant an article and pass WP:GNG, especially those with multiple books on the list. As an example: Inc Magazine #1 in Top 50 Leadership and Management Experts; Omaha World Herald "Unlock the power of your potential with John C. Maxwell; leadership guru is Chamber's keynote"; Forbes "John Maxwell's: 5 Tips To Becoming A Better Entrepreneur And Leader"; Singapore Straits Times "Maxwell 'loses his marbles' and now lives with No Limits"; Forbes India "Celebrating leadership"; Northwest Indiana Times "OFFBEAT with PHIL POTEMPA: Reader reminds John C. Maxwell ranks as leader for speaking"; Rappler "John C. Maxwell:  Grow Today, Grow Intentionally"
 * Wouldn't it be speedy keep, as no one else has weighed in yet? L3X1 ◊distænt write◊  21:52, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Whatever works for you, but it still applies: "The snowball clause is designed to prevent editors from getting tangled up in long, mind-numbing, bureaucratic discussions over things that are foregone conclusions from the start."--Paul McDonald (talk) 11:30, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. L3X1  ◊distænt write◊  21:52, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. L3X1  ◊distænt write◊  21:52, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. L3X1  ◊distænt write◊  21:52, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. L3X1  ◊distænt write◊  21:52, 19 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep AGF'ing that the nom simply failed at BEFORE, Maxwell's clearly notable; one need look no farther than the find sources template for plenty. Jclemens (talk) 03:47, 20 March 2018 (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.