Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Winston Edmondson (2nd nomination)


 * 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. consensus is now clear, after the relisting. I thank Ravenswing for his thorough analysis.  DGG ( talk ) 01:33, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Winston Edmondson
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

Subject does not meet Wikipedia Notability Standards. Being in articles does not mean standards are met. Running for mayor of Lewisville, for example, is not notable, especially if the mayor himself has not earned a page. AndLibertyForAll (talk) 03:57, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak keep Last AfD was just one month ago. Subject is the focus of multiple articles in reliable third-party publications. Just crosses the line on strength of being a former professional wrestler and a local radio host and an entrepreneur.  - Dravecky (talk) 19:45, 24 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, Logan Talk Contributions 18:57, 4 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 20:48, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 20:48, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 20:48, 4 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete: The previous AfD closed as a no consensus, after multiple relistings, with only one editor commenting on it; under the circumstances, it's not obnoxious to try again to seek a consensus. That being said, the subject is mentioned in the local small-town weekly newspaper's website (both articles in fact come from the same source); said paper does not have an article of its own, and the premise that this constitutes a reliable source is shaky.  But let's examine them anyway. The first source is to back the assertion that the subject created the "World’s Largest Suggestion Box," which is entirely backed by the subject's own claim that it is.  The same source is also used to support the article's contention that the subject invented a "RadioName concept," once again solely backed by the subject's own claims.  No evidence is proffered, however, as to what makes this concept notable, or any sources suggesting that the world has heard of it. The second source mentions the subject along with several other local mayoral candidates.  Were he to have won the race, that would fail of notability under WP:POLITICIAN given the small size of the city; failed candidates, of course, garner no presumptive notability. As far as Dravecky's assertion that the subject being a former professional wrestler contributes to notability, no reliable sources claim that he was.  The article states that the subject wrestled for a loop called the "CWA" operating out of Dallas, but the only such loop I could find was the Continental Wrestling Association, an outfit operating out of Memphis that folded when the subject was 17 years old.  Perhaps Dravecky did some research into verifying this claim, and I invite him to share the research with us. Sorry, but this adds up to a 0+0+0=0.  A failed mayoral candidate in a small city gains no notability under WP:POLITICIAN, which sets the minimum bar at a successful candidate for a large regional city.  A purported professional wrestler from a loop that (if it exists at all) is desperately obscure and/or defunct gains no notability from that, even if supported by reliable sources, which the assertion is not.  A local radio host gains no notability under WP:ENTERTAINER, which requires a "large fan base or a significant "cult" following," for which no sources have been proffered.    ῲ Ravenswing ῴ  09:11, 5 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - Lacks significant coverage in independent reliable sources to establish notability. -- Whpq (talk) 17:17, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per User:Ravenswing's excellent analysis of the given sources. Coverage is weak at best and many of the claims of importance ultimately cannot be corroborated from evidence other than the subject's own claims. -- Kinu  t/c 18:55, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:GNG. Stuartyeates (talk) 10:17, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable figure, vanity article. Keb25 (talk) 15:26, 10 September 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.