Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mike Cejka (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:18, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Mike Cejka
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Autobiographical article which fails WP:JOURNALIST. The only significant coverage which exists relates to a legal incident from 2009, which should not be included anyway per WP:BLPCRIME. schetm (talk) 02:04, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 05:19, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 05:19, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 05:20, 2 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete: Ironically enough, I voted to Keep ten years ago, but that was procedural; I wasn't sold on the subject's notability then and am not now.   Ravenswing   06:31, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete local meteorologists are almost never notable. We would have been better served 10 years ago if we had never done procedural keeps and had insisted it be shown a subject was notable. We are reaping the whirlwind of a bloated and less than useful Wikipedia from the wind we sowed then.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:44, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete for lack of a claim to notability and failure of adequate independent coverage. Nice try to stretch the Emmy Award to make it personal.  For a notable meteorologist see George Fischbeck from the pre-Internet days. --Bejnar (talk) 01:23, 9 October 2018 (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.