Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vince Coglianese


 * 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. Missvain (talk) 00:54, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Vince Coglianese

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Promotional article. WP:REFBOMBed, but no evidence of notability under WP:JOURNALIST or WP:GNG, despite talk page discussion. Fails to meet any of the prongs of WP:JOURNALIST. In a WP:BEFORE, no independent third-party sources found that are actually about the subject in sufficient detail for a BLP, rather than passing mentions or material by the subject. In the talk page discussion, the creator has failed to engage with the notability issues at all, lists extensive claims of notability-by-association, and added numerous sources to the article that didn't even mention the subject and broached multiple criteria of WP:REFBOMB. Even unreliable sources don't show a lot of mentions of "Vince Coglianese". Suggest deletion, or redirect to The Daily Caller. David Gerard (talk) 09:23, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 09:23, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 09:23, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 09:23, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 09:23, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete an overly promotional article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:35, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete It does well look like an advertisement ~Cupper (talk) 21:28, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep: Purely promotional material does not include numerous verifiable, secondary sources, especially not those which are negative on the subject. Promotional material does not typically include a section on controversy the subject has caused. The editor who has tagged and retagged this article has been unnecessarily provocative throughout, without any indication he particular cares what changes are made to the article. Such provocation and tags have been responded to with information at the talk page and improvements/changes to the article as indicated. As the subject is not classified as a journalist, rather a radio talk show co-host, journalist notability requirements should not apply. As for general notability guidelines, the coverage is certainly significant from numerous reliable, secondary sources, independent of the subject. The subject is notable enough for the current U.S. president to sit with him (at least twice) for interviews to discuss policy, as well as high-ranking members of the president's cabinet. He is notable enough to be asked to appear on the Tucker Carlson show, which has risen to the most-watched on cable television, as well as other prominent news shows. He is notable enough to be asked to speak and appear on panels at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference, and he is notable enough to be mentioned in the Heavy Hundred list of radio talk show hosts nationwide. His co-host, host who moved to afternoon from his timeslot, and host who comes in right after his show all have approved articles on Wikipedia. Other charges in the above paragraph are simply false and do not, for this reason, merit a response.--Artaxerxes (talk) 22:11, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
 * The claims above are belied by reading the talk page discussion. If WP:JOURNALIST is not appropriate, then he needs to meet WP:GNG - but, per talk, he doesn't do that either. Rather than attacking another editor, you need to find independent third-party sources found that are actually about the subject in sufficient detail for a BLP, and clearly demonstrate notability. This is not a complicated criterion - David Gerard (talk) 22:17, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 01:09, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete So he's the co-host of a local radio program for the last three years? Not at all notable. Oaktree b (talk) 03:48, 26 November 2020 (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.