Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Walt Heyer


 * 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. Nakon 04:44, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Walt Heyer

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:BLP of a person which doesn't make an especially strong claim of encyclopedic notability under any of our inclusion standards — while he's certainly got some marginal temporary newsiness as a person who's given quote to a couple of media outlets about something other than himself, that's far from the same thing as permanent enduring notability. The sourcing here, further, is quite weak: there are five sources here, all reference bombing a single statement, and four of them are lousy ones — #1 and #5 are blurbs which fail to constitute substantive coverage of him, #3 is a backgrounder on the website of a media analysis organization, and #4 is a raw text transcript of an interview with him (but interviews with the subject don't grant notability to the subject in and of themselves, per longstanding CFD consensus.) Only #2 contributes anything to getting him past WP:GNG, but one quality source isn't enough to get a person over the bar if they haven't cleanly passed any of our subject-specific inclusion rules. I'm certainly willing to withdraw this if the content and sourcing can be beefed up a lot better than this, but as written it's just not there. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 16:30, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. &mdash;&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·E·C) 02:48, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. &mdash;&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·E·C) 02:48, 22 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Wow, the stuff I miss by not listening to Rush Limbaugh . Never heard of this guy, so, thank you, Berian, for an education. I guess....  However, I ran a good-faith search. The Federalist (website), where he published his recent article, appears to be an edited political magazine, and not a vanishingly small one at that.  As for the "quote-bombing",  I figured he was just having a moment, because Bruce Jenner Caitlyn Jenner.  Heyer is certainly willing to give the counter-narrative a voice.  But he can only do that if reporters seek him out. And they do.  Quotes with potted biographies go back many pages on a google news search "by date", to this one from 2011: "Walt Heyer, whose book "Paper Genders" details his own experience transitioning from a man to a woman and back again, agreed. "The blockers should NOT be introduced to a child," Heyer said....' if you care, you can read what else he said here: .  that was from Fox News, although he gives such quotes to a wide range of outlets.  The university library I log on to doesn't have his books, but Amazon does, and people buy them.  Amazon even sells an Italian translation of Paper Genders    Look, I may not be on a wavelength with Heyer's politics,  but he's too notable to delete.  Keep. E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:45, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:33, 22 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete Writing news articles doesn't make you notable, being the topic does (albeit it's more complicated than that). Having your book bought a lot on amazon doesn't automatically make you notable either, if there's been no coverage. The fox news article you linked isn't about him, he's just quoted in it for his opinion so that also does not go towards establishing notability. The sources cited in this article seem to be coverage sparked by a single appearance on CNN or are the transcript of that appearance, so WP:BLP1E applies. Seems like a clear delete.Brustopher (talk) 21:14, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I still find my comment valid after Kuygvfe's expansion of the article. Brustopher (talk) 20:45, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep Content and references have been improved. I believe the sourcing is enough to pass the linked WP:GNG. Kuygvfe (talk) 23:27, 22 July 2015 (UTC) Striking SPA.  Nakon  04:46, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment Using your first edit to create a perfectly formatted revenge biography? Whose sock are you, ? DracoE 04:48, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Davewild (talk) 20:40, 28 July 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JAaron95  Talk  09:54, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * No opinion. I appear to have been mistaken for  in the discussion above. Bearian (talk) 19:46, 5 August 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.