Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tom Parker Bowles


 * 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. ✗ plicit  12:29, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

Tom Parker Bowles

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

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing General notability guideline nor the more detailed Notability (biographies) requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. As far as I can tell, the most in-depth, reliable coverage is this article The Telegraph about, errr, "Tom Parker Bowles talks posh pork scratchings". Pretty much everything here is referenced from passing mentions (WP:SIGCOV fail), or sources published by him. The strongest claim to fame is that "in 2010, won the Guild of Food Writers 2010 award for his writings on British food" (verified). Is this enough to keep this? Seems rather borderline. Let's discuss. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 10:09, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism and United Kingdom. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  10:09, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. Is there any reason for him to be considered notable apart from having a famous mother? While we're at it we may want to reflect on whether his sister, Laura Lopes, is notable.  Athel cb (talk) 11:03, 9 June 2022 (UTC)


 * @Athel cb Good find, I started Articles for deletion/Laura Lopes (3rd nomination). I can imagine some folks defending the subject here due to his work as a food critic (although I'd like to see SIGCOV on his significance). She has nothing going for her outside some passing tabloid mentions that she married into nobility and wore a moderately expensive wedding dress... Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 15:49, 9 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep; his cook-books sell widely and have been independently reviewed; two were reviewed in New York Times, here's the ref for the Fortnum and Mason one: . He was interviewed by a staff writer for the Guardian and although this is an interview, and therefore difficult to use factually, the fact he got chosen for an interview indicates some level of notability (the Guardian are rather selective in their interview subjects). Cosmopolitan have written about him . He's got himself in a meet-the-author in Readers Digest, and he was invited to take part in the Edinburgh Book Festival. This, together with the success of his cookery books, I think meets the target for a notable author. Elemimele (talk) 16:20, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. Agree this seems like a WP:AUTHOR pass. CT55555 (talk) 21:29, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. Appears to be plenty of coverage. Easily meets WP:GNG. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:08, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. There is plenty of coverage in independent reliable sources directly about the subject. For instance,, and , . While I personally find this sort of reporting by Britain's media to be pretty fawning, coverage of Mr. Parker Bowles easily meets the basic criteria of notability for people. Fiachra10003 (talk) 22:35, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep for all the reasons given by others. Tidy up discussion. --Bduke (talk) 01:01, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep There is zero reason to delete this article on a notable person. Keep, keep, keep.Utahredrock (talk) 04:43, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep - @ User:Piotrus, I believe you made a mistake. The sources cited above, and the food award you noticed yourself, likely make him notable. -  GizzyCatBella  🍁  19:45, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Et tu, Brute? :) Harrumph. I still think we are too friendly to gossip-level media, but oh well. It does appear most don't agree with this. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 08:19, 14 June 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.