Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mike Morgan (broadcaster)


 * 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. (non-admin closure) buffbills7701 16:44, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Mike Morgan (broadcaster)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable, sourced largely to press releases and blogs. PROD declined by entry creator's duplicate / sock account. Hairhorn (talk) 14:57, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of South Carolina-related deletion discussions.  Jinkinson   talk to me  15:06, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:29, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:29, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 02:47, 15 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete: As the nominator says, the article sources are PR and blog entries, one of which says "I don't know much about him" - hardly a WP:RS basis for a biographical article. No evidence of attained biogaphical notability. AllyD (talk) 09:21, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Still, I disagree. I don't think there would be a good redirect. If this page is deleted, I will try to create it on Articles for creation as I have did with Kevin Ray and Bob McElligott. Then how in the world would you make this article notable then to prevent it from deleting it? It makes no sense to me. Ashbeckjonathan (talk) 18:56, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * These are not PR nor blog entries Morgan steps down as USC voice, Announcer Mike Morgan's farewell to Gamecock Nation. Sancho 17:33, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I have to disagree with you on the second link, which is simply a written statement from the subject of the entry, not third party coverage. Hairhorn (talk) 18:11, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, it's third party coverage of simply a written statement from the subject. It's not like he just wrote this on his blog. Somebody thought it was worth disseminating. My point was that there are things other than blogs and PR about this guy. I don't know if the coverage in the non-blog, non-PR sources is significant enough to confer notability, though. Sancho 18:21, 23 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   09:58, 27 December 2013 (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.