Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael T. Scott
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 no consensus. (non-admin closure) | Uncle Milty | talk | 02:00, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Michael T. Scott (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This may seem to meet CSD, but I would rather have this go through this process. The man seems reasonably well-known in his field, and Google hits can be found, but none of the sites are reliable sources. —Theodore! (talk) (contribs) 02:18, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 02:20, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 02:20, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 02:22, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I've added more reliable sources to page, and also removed statements only supported by what can be considered unreliable, such as the subject's blog. As you mention the subject is well-known in the field and there are plenty of supported links online. It could be that the article needs refinement in how it is presented, via the addition of more reliable sources, rather that just deletion. Sophruhig Vita (talk) 18:29, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm just not sure that it's significant coverage in the reliable sources you've listed; many of the other sources still don't seem notable. Don't worry, I'm not hell-bent on getting this article deleted, but have doubts about whether the subject meets WP notability guidelines. —Theodore! (talk) (contribs) 23:26, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I've added more reliable sources to page, and also removed statements only supported by what can be considered unreliable, such as the subject's blog. As you mention the subject is well-known in the field and there are plenty of supported links online. It could be that the article needs refinement in how it is presented, via the addition of more reliable sources, rather that just deletion. Sophruhig Vita (talk) 18:29, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:04, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 00:59, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar · · 10:42, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.