Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Boardman


 * 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.   A rbitrarily 0   ( talk ) 23:25, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Mark Boardman

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

No indication of how this might meet notability guidelines. Lacks citations to significant coverage in reliable sources. Brief mention in newspaper blog is only secondary reference cited. Prod contested by anonymous editor. MuffledThud (talk) 14:10, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  —MuffledThud (talk) 14:14, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  —MuffledThud (talk) 14:14, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions.  —MuffledThud (talk) 14:14, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete essentially agree with nom. Unless more can be found in secondary RS then this person is not notable. Polargeo (talk) 14:40, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Unable to verify this show even exists on T4. Should the text be verified, I still don't see this warranting any more than a redirect to T4 (Channel 4). Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 15:54, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep and by all means cleanup and source. In a quck search, I found an in-depth article in Essex Echo speaking about the man and his hobbies, and in Wymondham and Attleborough Mercury I found another decent article on the man with confirmation of the Channel 4 show Homemade. Let's find more.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 20:47, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'm now convinced that this TV show does exist, but I see little sign of notability independently of the TV show, and the notability of the TV show itself is a bit iffy. If this show can be considered notable, then I suggest we move this to something like Homemade (UK television programme), write a quick stub about the programme itself and keep the few relevant encyclopaedic bits in this article. Otherwise, I'll stick with a redirect to T4, and any mention of Mark Boardman can go there. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 20:16, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Homemade ran for a series on T4 from 2006-2007 and followed Big Brother with an audience of 1.3 million. Notable TV performances also include BBC Inside out and This Morning (I found the evidence online)with audio from BBC radio stations. I see his website has nearly 400,000 hits last year too (thats notable) Links on mark Boardman listed as a minor celebrity 'blogger' with over 2500 followers Guardian website : Other indepth articles include —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.152.0.2 (talk) 16:55, 16 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Firstly, notability is not inheritied. Homemade may or may not pass notability, but it certainly won't count as notable just because it immediately followed a more notable TV programme. And if Homemade does pass notability, it does not follow that all people associated with the programme become notable. In order to attain notability, he would either need to meet the specific notablity guidelines for entertainers, or the more general notability criteria for people. I am not convinced he meets either. The entertainer criteria requires significant roles in multiple productions (in this case television shows), and as far as I can tell, he has a significant role in only one. The more general notability guideline for people requires significant coverage in secondary sources, and, for me, two articles in local papers, a trivial mention in a national paper and a mention in a section of Twitter that appears to be a semi-open wiki isn't enough. (And the number of hits on your own website has never been counted towards notability.) The additional coverage from TV and radio might count towards notability, but I'd have to see what it was - and if it's simply about appearances on Homemade, that would merely reinforce including him in a Homemade article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris Neville-Smith (talk • contribs)
 * Just found this on him. Regarded as a celebrity online and is well know in many circles — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.152.0.2 (talk)
 * Please don't edit other editors' comments, thank you. "beingpc.com" is a blog, and as a self-published source is not considered reliable. Are there any WP:Reliable sources to be found backing his notability: interviews, that sort of thing? Thanks, MuffledThud (talk) 13:12, 18 February 2010 (UTC) .  There are two interviews listed above in the local press, but one is a freesheet.  Not sure if this qualifies as substantial media coverage: can other editors comment? MuffledThud (talk) 07:05, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget  00:37, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete. This article has no reliable sources to pass WP:BIO. '  ArticlesFor Redemption  '' 03:04, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - What I can't spot right now are Wikipedia guidelines in how wide a region a publication is delivered to vs. notability. The subject of this AFD has received in-depth coverage in two news articles that get distributed to residents in half a dozen towns. In my mind, that does not satisfay "notable coverage" for the English Wikipedia.
 * Claire Borley of www.echo-news.co.uk appears to be a paid news reporter. She appears to have around 170 articles and the organization appears to pay their people. Thus this is not one of those blogging platforms and appears to pass Notability (people). The troublesome aspect is that this newspaper is covering a small region that covers six towns and the reporter (Claire Borley) covers people of local interest.
 * Stories in www.wymondhamandattleboroughmercury.co.uk do not have author bylines. I see they have a submit a story form. They don't list any submission guidelines but a quick scan finds that they only cover events of local interest. For example.. Their "About Us" reports once a week distribution to 15,300 homes in three towns plus nearby villages and another edition (it does not say what the publication frequency is) that goes to two towns plus nearby villages. Given the lack of verifiable bylines and the self-submissions I'm not comfortable calling this a "reputable media organization." --Marc Kupper&#124;talk 01:08, 27 February 2010 (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.