Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jon Bounds


 * 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   speedy keep. Google brings up a hell of a lot of sources so clear keep (non-admin closure) – Davey 2010 Talk 01:21, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Jon Bounds

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable Journotracker (talk) 07:53, 26 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep Notability is clearly established, with citations to reliable sources. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:01, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep - lots of news sources, WP:JNN (implying a lack of WP:BEFORE) is not a valid reason for deletion. The top hit is for calling Birmingham "not shit", but notable is notable. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  15:29, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep: Published in Birmingham Post and The Guardian isn't chicken feed.  Adequate indicia of notability.   Montanabw (talk)  19:23, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. N ORTH A MERICA 1000 21:03, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. N ORTH A MERICA 1000 21:03, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. N ORTH A MERICA 1000 21:04, 26 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep. Article is sourced to The Guardian and Birmingham Post. That seems sufficient to me. -- Calidum  06:50, 27 January 2015 (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.