Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sam Smith (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. Participants agree that the sources described in the discussion are sufficient to meet WP:BASIC. (non-admin closure) Enos733 (talk) 16:59, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Sam Smith (journalist)

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

Poorly sourced, limited notability. Author has written a few books and columns/articles but not a lot of sources independent of him. Andrevan @ 03:44, 22 July 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:41, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Journalism, Politics,  and United States of America. jp×g 04:08, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep this full-length article is entirely about Smith. This journal article also discusses his activism and ideas. Given the longevity of his career and his prominence in the world of alternative journalism, it seems evident that there are other articles about him as well.--User:Namiba 13:45, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Comment if sources provided by Namiba are considered as reliable independent sources, my comment is Keep, otherwise because of lack of significant coverage my comment will be Delete. —Natalie  Ricci Natalie 09:43, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
 * The first one is. The 2nd one I'm not sure. Andrevan @ 06:36, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
 * The 2nd source is a peer-reviewed academic journal, so I would say it qualifies as a reliable independent source. Sal2100 (talk) 21:17, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I just wasn't sure if it was a trivial mention or actually covers him in some depth per WP:SIGCOV. Andre🚐 18:16, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak keep While WP:RS-based significant coverage of the subject dosen't appear to be voluminous, the sources cited by Nambia plus this finding on Google Books make a credible case for borderline notability per WP:BASIC. Sal2100 (talk) 21:34, 3 August 2022 (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.