Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rod Clarke


 * 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:48, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Rod Clarke

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Promotional article. His one book, though it did have reviews, WorldCat is self-published and is in almost no libraries.  DGG ( talk ) 19:38, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:09, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:09, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:09, 3 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep -- I think ther may be a few things in his career that just about qualify him for notability. The article needs considerable improvement and wikifying.  Peterkingiron (talk) 10:20, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 04:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

 
 * Delete. There's nothing to see here but WP:BOMBARD, with no real WP:RS whatsoever to fulfill the demands of WP:AUTHOR, WP:BK, or WP:GNG. Qworty (talk) 06:11, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 18:08, 17 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete: Non-notable author of non-notable book. Promotion and puffery. Lack of substantial coverage in multiple reliable independent sources. Nothing worth saving or merging. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 04:42, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. Clarke looks like he would be a reliable source as far as sourcing articles about the applicable subject matter, (and is used in several articles) but as far as notability goes? He doesn't pass notability guidelines. Being an authority doesn't give notability, it just makes it very slightly more likely that the person will gain coverage. As far as his accomplishments go, while they are impressive they aren't anything that would mark him as being a pioneer or otherwise exceptionally exceptional. He has received some nods from others in the community, but not from any sources that would really show that he would pass notability guidelines as far as his books or articles go. Clarke is one of many, many people who have done much but still flew solidly under the radar to where they never got covered enough (or at all) to pass notability guidelines. I have no problem with anyone userfying the page if they wanted to. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   09:10, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Close now as delete -- I voted weak keep above, but defer to the opinionof others.  Peterkingiron (talk) 16:01, 22 April 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.