Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonathan Mann (journalist)


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Spirit of Eagle (talk) 06:24, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Jonathan Mann (journalist)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )



Nothing at all convincing for the applicable notability and my searches have simply found nothing better. I nearly PRODed too but, in case it was removed because of the CNN International connection. SwisterTwister  talk  07:08, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  07:09, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  07:09, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * This looks and reads very much like the kind of thinly veiled rewrite of his own staff profile on his own employer's website that we all too frequently see for journalists, and its only reference is a deadlinked article in a university alumni magazine, for which he was the bylined writer of the piece. This is not how a journalist gets a Wikipedia article, however — he has to be the subject of the references, not the author of them, to get over WP:GNG. Delete, unless somebody can salvage it with much better sourcing, and rewrite it more encyclopedically, than this. Bearcat (talk) 16:43, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. A quick search yields close to three dozen articles about him in major newspapers in the 1980s. There's also plenty about him in recent years (examples a, b, c, d). The article needs to be improved, but he meets WP:GNG. T.C.Haliburtontalk nerdy to me 00:35, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 04:41, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2016 May 27.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 07:01, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America1000 08:55, 27 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep - Journalists are notoriously hard to "source out" in a deletion debate, but TCHaliburton is on the right track. THIS piece from the Montreal Gazette lends credence to the fact that this veteran journalist doesn't just report the news but is in fact sometimes part of it. Sufficient career achievement to merit inclusion, in my estimation. Carrite (talk) 16:02, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

 References
 * Keep – The subject meets WP:BASIC. Source examples include, but are not limited to those listed below. Sometimes the default "find sources" links atop AFD discussions do not provide much coverage; sources can often be found by customizing search terms a bit and not relying only on Google. See also: Criticism of Google § Possible misuse of search results. North America1000 07:58, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
 * "CNN-ikon: - Derfor nekter jeg å gå på Nobels gallamiddag". Nettavisen. (English-translated article)
 * "When Jonathan Mann and Israelis meet". Jewish Journal.
 * "Jonathan Mann on privilege of interviewing Nobel Peace Prize winners". Philippine Daily Inquirer.
 * "Montreal reporter jailed in India appears before Amritsar court". The Montreal Gazette.
 * "CNN Dildo Blooper: Jonathan Mann Confuses Flightless Bird For Adult Toy During Interview". The Huffington Post.
 * Keep The sources provided by Tchaliburton clearly demonstrate that Jonathan Mann passes Notability. He has received significant coverage from the Philippine Daily Inquirer and The Montreal Gazette. Cunard (talk) 04:28, 4 June 2016 (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.