Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeff Ansell

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. Uncontested; see WP:SOFTDELETE. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:09, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jeff Ansell

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

WP:BLP of a public relations consultant and former broadcast journalist, with little evidence of the reliable source coverage needed to clear the notability standards for either occupation -- this is based almost entirely on primary sources, such as press releases and his staff profiles on the websites of organizations he's been directly affiliated with, and the only two references here that might actually have been media coverage about him are both unverifiable deadlinks. And while I can't prove anything outright, the creator's username "Janny64" is similar enough to the subject's name to ping my conflict of interest radar. As always, it's the depth and quality of reliable source coverage about a journalist or PR consultant that determines whether they get a Wikipedia article or not, not just the fact that it claims but badly sources things that might sound impressive. Bearcat (talk) 16:15, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 21:12, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 21:12, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 21:12, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:02, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J 947^{^{^(c)}} 00:26, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:30, 22 April 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.