Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jack Scott (author)

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. czar 05:05, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Scott (author)[edit]

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

Delete. WP:BLP of a blogger and activist, written with a decidedly advertorial skew to it and referenced exclusively to primary sources with no evidence of reliable source coverage about him shown at all. As always, a blogger is not automatically entitled to a Wikipedia article just because he exists; he must be reliably sourceable as passing a specific notability criterion, but nothing here shows that. Bearcat (talk) 00:45, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Per nom. The article is self-sourced. Searching found only a book he wrote. Nothing suggesting notability found. Gab4gab (talk) 16:41, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete an article on a writer based entirely on primary sources.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:27, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 09:00, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 09:00, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - searches did not turn up enough to show they pass WP:GNG, and they definitely don't meet WP:NAUTHOR. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:55, 3 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - non-notable author.CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 22:27, 3 March 2017 (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.