Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kim Hughes (radio)

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. NW (Talk) 02:13, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kim Hughes (radio)[edit]

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

Unable to find any reliable sources independent of the subject sufficient to establish notability. This radio personality/journalist does not appear to meet WP:GNG. This WP:BLP has gone unsourced for nearly four years. J04n(talk page) 12:19, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. —J04n(talk page) 12:19, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. —J04n(talk page) 12:19, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete few sources and don't think being editor-in-chief of Lavalife or Amazon.ca merits an article. Round the Horne (talk) 19:09, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete nothing to prove notability, seems to be an ordinary person working in media. Markiewp (talk) 20:05, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Someone doing a job. And no references to show any notability that might be is in fact real. Peridon (talk) 21:54, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Although GBooks shows that Hughes has written for Billboard, GBooks/Scholar/News Archive fail to indicate that Hughes meets the conditions for notability required on Wikipedia -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 19:15, 10 August 2010 (UTC) Changed to keep - see below[reply]
Delete Fails WP:N as mentioned above. Jeepday (talk) 00:21, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Sorry I did not come across this discussion earlier, but Kim Hughes was "one of the best-known music radio personalities in Canada" in the 1990s. That's not just my opinion, it's a direct quote from Canadian Musician magazine, which I just cited in the article. In 1999 the Toronto Star called her "one of the Toronto pop-music industry's most respected and influential figures". As she was "regarded as an important figure", the subject meets WP:BIO. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 02:47, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In light of the sources found by Paul Erik that have been added to the article I am adding a keep vote. I will not withdraw the nomination just yet as there were a significant number of delete !votes, so I'll let them decide if they want to change. If they change their !votes I'll withdraw. J04n(talk page) 13:50, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The article meets WP:GNG and WP:BLP. Argolin (talk) 22:56, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per sources found by Paul Erik - well found! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 23:32, 14 August 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.