Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alan rush

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. Stifle (talk) 08:44, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alan Rush[edit]

Rush doesn't seem to meet the notability requirements of WP:BIO. Though he has written quite some number of books, I can't find sources that are about him himself. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 12:23, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The contact details at the end make this look like an autobio. No independent refs. (Correction: probably written by a very close female friend of his.) — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 17:53, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Explanation why this article should be kept KittyAsia (talk) 19:20, 6 September 2008 (UTC) — KittyAsia (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

1. Notability: Mr Rush is a respected authority on Kuwait and the Hashimite dynasty, and merits greater presence on the internet.

2. Contact details: removed.

3. Independent reference: one of Mr Rush's own articles on The Independent and one third party link have been added. There will be more to come.

Comment I believe it was Tom Cruise who said, Show me the sources. If he's notable, needs sources, and Alan Rushs own article is hardly independent of him. - Jimmi Hugh (talk) 02:24, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No sources, non-notable Author. - Jimmi Hugh (talk) 02:24, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Objection to proposed deletion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:INSPECTOR

KittyAsia (talk) 21:44, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep More sources are appearing. Seems like a man of some (albeit modest) importance in a specialised field. Perhaps just about notable enough to meet criteria of WP:BIO. Airborne64 — Airborne64 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
- what sources? Corvus cornix_talk 23:47, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 22:16, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete non-notable author without significant coverage in reliable 3rd party sources. Whether he "merits greater presence on the internet" or not he still has to meet the criteria to be included within this project. Jasynnash2 (talk) 11:35, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Anyone can publish a book. The question is whether he is someone who is cited. It doesn't seem that he is that big in the field. SpeechFreedom (talk) 12:55, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Rush appears to be an editor, not an author. Edward321 (talk) 14:47, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep The distinction between an editor and an author for complex works of the sort is sometimes rather thin. I think it's sufficient to pass, considering the expected major libraries seem to have the books. DGG (talk) 02:08, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:02, 16 September 2008 (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.