Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nathan Janes


 * 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. T. Canens (talk) 15:37, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Nathan Janes

 * – ( View AfD View log )

I find no reason to believe the subject's notability; see this. Note: there are some things in the history that seem more reliable than the current set of 'references' (none of which are reliable sources by our standards), but still not enough, in my opinion. Drmies (talk) 19:24, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 01:34, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 01:34, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

I left the sources that were already on the article and simply added additional information as the article asked for. Everything is backed up by reliable sources. What references are not "reliable sources" by wikipedia's standards? — Preceding unsigned comment added by KaitlynM87 (talk • contribs) 19:25, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Also, on the link you provided saying there is no reason that he is notable, he appears in the 7th and 8th search results on that page, amongst others farther down. KaitlynM87 (talk —Preceding undated comment added 21:44, 29 June 2011 (UTC). 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:06, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

 Delete per nom and WP:ARTIST. None of the sources establish notability and most are user-generated, reading very much like press releases--prweb.com doesn't look like a reliable source; opednews.com is not either. P.Oxy.2354 (talk) 06:10, 18 July 2011 (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.