Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Kennedy (chemistry spokesperson)

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. Tone 07:16, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

James Kennedy (chemistry spokesperson)[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Originally nominated by me for PROD with the justification Non-notable individual. No coverage in independent reliable sources beyond mere mentions, generally in connection with an art project he did listing the chemicals in "natural" foods. Doesn't meet, WP:GNG, WP:NBIO, is arguably a case of WP:BLP1E based on provided coverage.

The PROD was blocked, and additional sources were added, including some Chinese ones that are harder for me to verify. However, as far as I can tell these additional sources do not establish notability (regardless of whether or not they are reliable), as they are mere mentions of the subject in connection to a school he works at. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 22:09, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The subject is notable for having created the fruit ingredients posters that went viral among chemistry circles. He is also notable for having authored a book on people's irrational fear of chemicals, which is available on Amazon. He is also notable for running workshops and speaking at events worldwide to spread the same message. Some of these lectures were recorded live and are available in the references cited. Tianjinren88 (talk) 22:48, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:17, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:17, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:17, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:17, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:17, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Non-notable person. This BLP is nothing but promotionalism. Xxanthippe (talk) 03:37, 7 October 2018 (UTC).[reply]
Delete Probably self-promotionalism. This was declined at AfC.PRehse (talk) 09:21, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete with a redirect. The campaign the subject runs for "natural chemicals" would I suggest have more than enough WP:NEXIST to easily support WP:GNG. It has multiple references from independent reliable sources over a number of years. I suggest that the "natural chemicals" subject will have reasonable interest, but not the current subject person per se at this time. Notability is not inherited. I suggest that the article be WP:TNTed and redone about "natural chemicals" with the current subject strongly mentioned with due weight and with a redirect from the current title to the new article. Aoziwe (talk) 12:31, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. As someone interested in food and chemistry, I'm familiar with the work of James Kennedy and I've seen his infographics in many places. But I'm not sure he meets criteria outlined at WP:BIO. I think his work trying to teach the public about chemophobia is worth mentioning somewhere on Wikipedia (Googling the term chemophobia and james kennedy turns up many results). He may be individually responsible for popularization of the term. At the very least, his name should redirect to that article. Deli nk (talk) 12:26, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per solid arguments made above. This article does appear to be promotional in nature and the sources leave a lot to be desired. Deli nk and Aoziwe have suggested sound alternatives. Sakaimover (talk) 03:47, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Wikipedia is not a free webhost for the publishing of promotional autobiographies. duffbeerforme (talk) 10:53, 11 October 2018 (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.