Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glen Jenvey

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 Keep (NAC) Garibaldi Baconfat 19:31, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Glen Jenvey

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This subject of this biography of a freelance journalist is of questionable notability and there are serious WP:BLP concerns. The subject has been named as contributing to some published articles but few have appeared in mainstream publications. Of the references in the article, the Sri Lankan Ministry of Defence is reproducing this article from Global Politician which appears to be a self-published source. The main point made by the CBS Evening News piece about Jenvey is that he is not significant. He has appeared in brief excerpts on TV news broadcasts but that does not amount to them being about him. The later section about doubts on his credibility is strongly linked to equally non-mainstream sources save for the latest news from 31 December 2009. Summing up, I doubt that he is notable as a journalist, and there are positive dangers in writing a properly verifiable article from reliable sources which accurately reports on the credibility debate. Sam Blacketer (talk) 12:24, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I believe that there is absolutely no question of notability of this subject. Handschuh-^{talk to me} 12:37, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep My edits to this article have been almost entirely cite requests, and anti-vandalism. Nevertheless, the subject does appear to be a noteworthy crank who likes to market himself, and should remain. Parrot of Doom 01:45, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Relevant to UK reporting; this article covers someone who managed to create fake fear of terrorist articles in the UK press, has now been arrested by the police. His attempts to sock-puppet wikipedia are related but are insignificant. While it may originally have been a self-promotion entry, as the court case proceeds, I would expect it to change in content. SteveLoughran (talk) 16:58, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Timotheus Canens (talk) 01:01, 8 January 2010 (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.