Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ryan McClellan


 * 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. Deor (talk) 12:50, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Ryan McClellan

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

PROD declined by article author. Article has been written by subject himself; subject doesn't appear to be meet notability guidelines (lack of independent sources, with the biggest claim to fame being the creator of a new and also non-notable organization). Article is also written in a promotional tone in regards to the subject's organization (TheDeafSociety). ~ Super  Hamster  Talk Contribs 18:46, 29 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete I can only find 1 source but even that is not reliable. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Through-Jaded-Eyes-Ryan-McClellan-ebook/dp/B0017L8BQQ Wrightie99 (talk) 19:11, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:12, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:13, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:13, 29 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete Fails WP:GNG WP:RS WP:COI. A baby picture? --Jersey92 (talk) 02:36, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - WP:GNG - Claims of notability are not supported by reliable sources. General lack of significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. - Taketa (talk) 13:00, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete -- WP:GNG. no reliable sources to back up claims. There should be reliable sources readily accessible on the web for such a recent organization. As an aside, in reference to !votes above, WP:COI and photos of the article subject at whatever stage of life are not good arguments at AfD. Arguments_to_avoid_in_deletion_discussions &mdash; Gaff  ταλκ 01:00, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment Understood. Fails WP:GNG WP:RS should be sufficient to support deleting this. To explain further: There simply aren't WP:RS to support the claims of notability in the article. --Jersey92 (talk) 05:06, 31 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. Besides being an obvious autobiography, I don't see anything but social networking sites. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:47, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:GNG, more specifically WP:BIO, and even more specifically WP:ENT. And yes, it is also pretty close to having been speediable under G11. Wikipedia is is not for self-promotion. Valfontis (talk) 17:45, 5 November 2014 (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.