Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonathan Wynne-Jones


 * 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. &mdash; Coffee //  have a cup  //  essay  // 05:43, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Jonathan Wynne-Jones

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable freelance journalist under WP:GNG. Runner up for an award, and there's been other coverage of routine job moves, but nothing more and nothing rises to significant coverage in reliable sources. Batard0 (talk) 18:51, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment - When using the rule WP:GNG the criteria say to delete this article, because virtually everything concerning this person has been news stories written by him. However, the list of these stories takes up pages on a Google search for 'Jonathan Wynne-Jones'. I looked at many of these stories and they are mostly very sound news stories. He has addressed some very unique and newsworthy subjects. The only problem is the lack of independent information about him. I cannot in good faith recommend deleting the article, but it clearly does not meet the criteria to be kept under the WP:GNG rule. Also, the article is only a stub. Much more information needs to be in the article.Bill Pollard (talk) 22:13, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 17:41, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 17:41, 12 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment WP:GNG is not a deletion criteria, but a notability guideline.  Reliable material that is not part of a notable topic should or can be merged; and if a topic is not notable, it may already be covered elsewhere in the encyclopedia, and a merge or redirect is appropriate.  Unscintillating (talk) 22:08, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
 * What article could this conceivably be merged into or redirected toward if it does not meet WP:GNG? --Batard0 (talk) 02:48, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Not really sure. I looked at some ideas, but maybe another editor can suggest something.  Unscintillating (talk) 05:06, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment I found 40 articles (ref) in mainspace referencing this author. Unscintillating (talk) 05:06, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, KTC (talk) 00:23, 19 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Unfortunate Delete As Wpollard said, everything I find is written by him, not about him. As much as I agree that the articles are sound, I fail to see how he passes WP:GNG. That said, I think it would be a worthwhile project for Wikipedia to look into a separate notability guideline for reporters, because there is rarely coverage about them, just coverage they wrote on someone or something else making it tricky to pass WP:GNG. Go   Phightins  !  02:13, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * A very weak delete per Go Phightins! above. He doesn't pass GNG, and there really aren't reliable sources that cover him.  Furthermore, I don't think the subjects he is known for reporting on really distinguish the reporter that much - they're important, but fairly commonplace, and he wouldn't have received as much coverage, say, as someone caught up in the Egyptian Revolution while reporting last year.   dci  &#124;  TALK   02:10, 19 October 2012 (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.