Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeff Peters

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:35, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jeff Peters[edit]

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

Fails the notability guidelines for people, and there are no reliable sources on the page to back up anything said there. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 16:31, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2013 February 2. Snotbot t • c » 18:52, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:38, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:38, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 00:15, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LlamaAl (talk) 00:22, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have to agree with the nominator, seems to be a delete - the page itself does not make a clear claim to notability, has no significant independent references, and from my searches I can find no such material which would support an argument for the notability of the subject of this article --_nonsense ferret 16:56, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

delete Written some books, but we'd need critical comment on them saying that these books had a significant influence before that was enough. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:39, 19 February 2013 (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.