Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scott Stevens (weatherman)


 * 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. Also raises WP:BLP issues.  Sandstein  08:42, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Scott Stevens (weatherman)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article does not meet notability, verifiability, or reference guidelines. WP:N, WP:V, WP:RS Byates5637 (talk) 14:49, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Update: The entry has been reverted to an earlier revision that is of higher quality and contains a reference, but I still do not think that this meets the notability guidelines.Byates5637 (talk) 20:29, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable. Current version of the entry is a mess, it presents crackpot theories as established "global phenomena". Possibly notable in pseudoscience circles, although it's hard to say. Hairhorn (talk) 20:20, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:46, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Conspiracy theories-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:46, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:46, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:46, 2 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete as inadequately sourced. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:25, 2 November 2012 (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.