Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephen Johnston (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Tawker (talk) 19:12, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Stephen Johnston
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I question the notability of this subject. The only claim to notability is the Thomas Jefferson Award of the Freedom_Foundation, an award not listed in the WP article on the Foundation. Audio Bibles and Ronco adverts carry no notability that I can see. Peridon (talk) 21:29, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment There was another claim to notability that used to be in the article, Emmy Award winner] that was removed in December 2013 and again when the speedy deletion tag that I declined was readded. Also as I was going back through the history of the article, this was changed from an article about one person to the current person.  GB fan 22:33, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Strong delete Article has no references, has almost no information, subject is not notable. Neptune&#39;s Trident (talk) 00:37, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment So far as I can see, it's the same person. The earlier article was about him as a film-maker, and that was delete4d at AfD. It revived, and switched in 2008 to film-maker and bible reader. Then the films were dropped. Doubts were cast on the Emmy in the 2007 AfD, as it could not be found in the Academy lists - and nor could the Jefferson Award anywhere. I can't find Johnston in our Emmy lists. You wouldn't get an Emmy for narrating the Bible or doing Ronco ads, would you? Peridon (talk) 09:23, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
 * They are definitely two different people. This article as it currently stands appears to be about the person described in this linkedin account.  Since he was the founder of a company in 1971 he could not have been born in 1968 as the original person written in the article was.  The Emmy award claim appears to be from work with PBS.  I haven't been able to find any reliable sources to support the information in the linkedin, but if we do, he is probably notable.  GB fan 10:21, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Might be that the article was gradually switched, then. The Foundation is the 'Freedoms Foundation' of Valley Forge (no apostrophe but with 's'), and it appears to be an organisation that works with young people. I can't find a list of its award programme or a list of awardees. I also can't find this elusive Emmy. The LinkedIn stuff looks very promotional (as is to be expected - that's what it's there for...) and, of course, isn't referenced (as is to be expected). If evidence is found for notability, I'll happily withdraw the nomination. I prefer to regard AfD as 'for discussion' than necessarily 'for deletion', although the latter is often the only course. Peridon (talk) 11:27, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
 * This 'Thomas Jefferson Award' should not be confused with the Jefferson Awards for Public Service which are most definitely notable. Peridon (talk) 11:39, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Strong Delete: Agree with Neptune's Trident, there is barely a sentence in the "article". No citing of sources or references, falls well short of Wik guidelines and standards. M.Jormungand (talk) 10:56, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete After searching for the one major claim to notability that has ever been in the article, the Emmy, I have found nothing. I can not find anything to indicate he meets the notability guidelines.  GB fan 15:11, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:44, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:44, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete Article lacks any working references, and the non-working reference seems to be a primary one. fails GNG.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:19, 4 April 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.