Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephen J. Blackwood


 * 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. Keeper |  76  00:34, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Stephen J. Blackwood

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article subject is not notable under either WP:GNG or WP:ACADEMIC; most of the article content is not supported by sources. I propose to merge and redirect to Ralston College, as Blackwood's only claim to notability at this point is his founding of this still-not-operational start-up college, of which he is president. The college has a valid claim to notability through coverage in a blog piece by Stanley Fish on the New York Times website. Blackwood is named in that piece but he is not the topic, and we need to remember that notability is not inherited. Some information about him belongs in the Ralston College article, but a stand-alone article is not warranted. Note on related XfDs: I am separately starting Articles for deletion/St. George's YouthNet, for an organization with which Blackwood is associated, and I intend to go to WP:CFD with some categories related to Ralston College. Orlady (talk) 17:02, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Orlady (talk) 18:35, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete Does not appear to have received any significant coverage in independent reliable secondary sources, as required by WP:N. &mdash;gorgan_almighty (talk) 18:46, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. A new Ph.D. with a job leading a new school with no news coverage that I can find does not seem to meet WP:GNG and I don't think the school yet meets the standard of "major academic institution" required by WP:PROF. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:46, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - I very rarely contribute to an AFD with just, "per nom". But the well-reasoned nomination in this instance includes all the justification I could ever offer for supporting deletion. So... delete, per nom. Stalwart 111  23:58, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not much else to say. This article fails to stand on its own. Ducknish (talk) 00:06, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Merge and Redirect per nom -- the school could soon become important enough for its president to have an article under PROF#C6 (the bar is pretty low), but it's not there yet. There are enough RS in good places to keep the article on the school, as the nominator supports, but not for this recent Ph.D. at this point. -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 03:15, 13 March 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.