Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ken Pugh (Fellow Consultant)


 * 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. Lankiveil (speak to me) 10:41, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Ken Pugh (Fellow Consultant)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Promotional, lack of reliable, independent sources Liz  Read! Talk! 19:12, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.  Liz  Read! Talk! 19:12, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions.  Liz  Read! <b style="color:#006400;">Talk!</b> 19:12, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions.  Liz  <sup style="font-family:Times New Roman;"><b style="color:#006400;">Read!</b> <b style="color:#006400;">Talk!</b> 19:12, 24 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Possible keep About 100 library holding for each of his books, but I can find only notices, not substantial reviews, &#39;DGG (at NYPL)&#39; (talk) 19:39, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete promotional content and improperly sourced. If someone wants to write a proper article it would be better to start fresh. Candleabracadabra (talk) 00:30, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:02, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:02, 25 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep In addition to DGG's WorldCat, I'm also seeing high end-user holdings at LibraryThing (book ranked book #142,548 out of 8 million titles cataloged by users), but also unable to find book reviews. Unusual. However a search of  shows use in the classroom. That would explain both the high library and end-user holdings (school textbook). How many syllabus examples are needed to prove notability is purely subjective but most syllabus are ephemeral so even seeing a couple is a good sign there are many more not visible and this shows a dozen at least (have not looked through them all). The article content can be cleaned up easily enough since AfD is topic-level not content-level.  --  Green  C  02:51, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Actually I think my argument above is for WP:NBOOK not AUTHOR. If anyone knows how or if a textbook author is applied, perhaps with WP:PROF. -- Green  C  02:56, 27 February 2014 (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.