Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Karl Coryat


 * 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 no consensus. Pax:Vobiscum (talk) 09:43, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Karl Coryat

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non notable person just plain and simple. This article just feels like it may have been written and or edited by someone with a close connection to this person. Pahiy (talk) 23:48, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:54, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:54, 24 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete not notable at all.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:24, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment As the originator of this article (in 2012), I recuse myself from this discussion. However, let me point out a few things that might get missed:
 * 1. In addition to the other references, the subject has been awarded two prizes by a major international physics organization, the Foundational Questions Institute — one as a writer and one as a videomaker.
 * 2. Over the past 90 days, this article has averaged 18 views per day, with a significant increase in January, peaking at 91 on January 15. By comparison, for the 20 most recent author-related AfDs that ended in "Keep," that number averages 7.95 views per day.  -Jord gette  [talk]  18:29, 27 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete. The new awards are minor. Much of the media coverage cited is about Jennings and other famous contestants, not Coryat. Bearian (talk) 18:25, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Would the Coryat score be considered "a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in a specific field"? (WP:ANYBIO) Although it's not an academic or professional field, Jeopardy is a specific field with a huge fanbase, and within that field, the Coryat score is widely recognized as a significant part of contestant statistics (enough to be cited by Atlantic, Wired, etc.). Coryat himself is mentioned in the first sentence of a Christian Science Monitor article on Jeopardy. Here are three other RS references not included in the article: Fivethirtyeight, Chicago Tribune , Slate .  -Jord gette   [talk]  19:04, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep This is tricky, because he doesn't have major notability in one area, but minor notability across multiple areas. Taken on the whole, he is notable for the number and quality (and diversity) of the sources, and because a Google search turns up endless references to the "Coryat score" among enthusiasts of that universe. PorkHeart (talk) 04:16, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 15:36, 31 January 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   16:32, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. I agree a SIGCOV argument would be quite weak, unless there's someone who can round up sources from back in the 90s newspapers. He is noted, however, for being the inspiration for the "Coryat score" (see this as an example, and many other articles). I think for this reason and its related coverage, at least a stub is appropriate or could very well be for the Coryat score itself. He's also the author of "The Frustrated Songwriter's Handbook", but I couldn't find any significant reviews for that book. PK650 (talk) 23:14, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep: I agree with the points raised by PorkHeart and PK650, he doesn't have SIGCOV but still he is notable to deserve a page. Shashanksinghvi334 (talk) 10:05, 16 February 2020 (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.