Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tommy Newberry


 * 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. causa sui (talk) 00:29, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Tommy Newberry

 * - (View AfD) (View log)

The individual is not notable and the entire article does nothing but promote the individual's business interests. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jlchan29 (talk • contribs) 2011/07/08 21:14:00
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 11:58, 14 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Weak delete I thought this might meet criteria 3 or 4c of WP:AUTHOR, since his books are his main claim to notability, but I've been unable to find any professional reviews. Yunshui (talk) 12:53, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 16:23, 14 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:04, 21 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Answer to Weak Delete Assertion - I don't know what "weak delete" means. Hoewver, I'm open to being wrong but I'm wondering how my delete request can be "weak" (if that's what the person above meant) when Wikipedia's notability requirements necessitate the following, "has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." (WP GNG) Since no one has found any such references it would appear that the subject cannot be declared "notable" at this time.

Plus, even if Tommy Newberry does meet the notability guidelines, the article about him doesn't meet the "biography" guidelines. It doesn't have any info about the gentleman's birthday, educational background, or professional experience. All it contains is a 2-sentence endorsement that looks like it came off the back of one of his books. Presumably someone could have added more relevant info if his/her agenda was something other than marketing Tommy Newberry's material.

These article should be deleted because it's clearly an advertisement rather an effort to create a real article AND no one has demonstrated that the subject is notable per Wikipedia's guidelines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jlchan29 (talk • contribs) 19:44, 23 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. I'm unable to find any major reviews of Newberry's book, and limited news coverage apart from one or two articles like this, where he is listed as one of a few Tea Party speakers. -- Lear's Fool 07:08, 28 July 2011 (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.