Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rob Walker (journalist)


 * 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 keep‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 08:05, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Rob Walker (journalist)

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Nominated for 3 reasons:
 * 1) As a sort of "mercy killing". The person doesn't want an article about them, as they have said there multiple times.
 * 2) Wikipedia's WP:SIGCOV policy says that the coverage needs to address the topic "directly and in detail". Discounting the citations that are connected to Rob, we are left with these citations: HBR, QZ, Design Observer, Salon, Chicago Tribune and several NYT articles. Most of these are fleeting mentions of Mr Walker, and the remainder are focussed on the topics covered by individual books (which already have their own articles) rather than Mr Walker himself. So I don't believe that the coverage addresses Mr Walker "directly and in detail", as required.
 * 3) Aside from any Wikipedia policy, I don't believe there is any benefit of having an article which is basically a copy of Mr Walker's CV.

If anyone is wondering who I am, I have no connection to Mr Walker, I just read the article and thought I would try to help. My only other edits have been a few small additions (nothing relating to Mr Walker) from an IP address.

Regards, Capitan Farmhouse (talk) 05:24, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 05:39, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 05:40, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 05:40, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 05:40, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 05:41, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 05:41, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:AUTHOR — Walker's work has been the primary subject of multiple independent RS pieces. As a side note, Walker's linked interview in which he's not crazy about having a page here is from 2015 and is ambivalent at best: I don’t need the page removed, he said, but mostly he just didn't want it to be incorrect. Retswerb (talk) 08:29, 17 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep, also per WP:AUTHOR. He definitely meets the criteria of having created a well-known that has "been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews". Jonathan Deamer (talk) 09:49, 17 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep, WP:AUTHOR really seems like it hits notability stuff and the article wraps up on a decent "Well I guess this is okay" note. I know Walker vaguely and I get where he is coming from (my own Wikipedia article is out of date!) but I think the response to that is to make his page more accurate and timely. Jessamyn (my talk page) 18:14, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep — the photo has been changed and content updated (corrected, I think?) since he wrote that article (in 2015!), and he seems to meet the general notability and references requirements. Dotx3 (talk) 17:08, 19 December 2023 (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.