Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve Quayle


 * 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 --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 01:27, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Steve Quayle

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Subject does not appear to have attracted the attention of multiple independent third party news sources— references are mostly primary or are not independent (i.e., the subject's own web site is the first reference; an Amazon list of books is not evidence of notability; etc.). Subject does not appear to meet the notability requirements of WP:BIO. KDS 4444 Talk  11:54, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Keep I disagree. The subject is a published author and is widely cited by his peers WP:AUTHOR and a quick bit of research demonstrates that the subject has a noteworthy following WP:GNG. If your complaint is to lack of references, or mis-placed refs, this can be cleaned up. Additionally, further content can be added, such as the subject implication in a precious metals fraud scheme. Adding content will take some time. Please allow for this. Delhiwallah (talk) 12:11, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Added Sources. Concerned references have been removed and further new stories related to his business have been added. Delhiwallah (talk) 13:40, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:35, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:35, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Paranormal-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:35, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:35, 29 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete Fails WP:SIGCOV. Sources range from mere passing references to subject, to self-published sources lacking any apparent editorial oversight, to those w/ clear promotional ties to the subject.   Levdr1 lp  /  talk  11:07, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * Delete - Especially when considering WP:FRINGEBLP and WP:BLPCRIME, there just aren't sufficient good sources to establish significant coverage in reliable sources. &mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  \\ 22:40, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nakon  21:44, 4 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. Fails to meet notability requirements due to lack of reliable sources. Philg88 ♦talk 04:25, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete _ I only see one reliable source; fails GNG. Bearian (talk) 20:37, 7 April 2015 (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.