Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leon Carroll

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 --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 01:36, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Leon Carroll[edit]

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

no evidence of notability by WP:PROF, GNG or AUTHOR. Promotional article, part of a promotional campaign. DGG ( talk ) 18:18, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 19:51, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 19:51, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 19:51, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 19:51, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - All this seems fitting for AfD considering WP:PROF, draft and userfy later if needed as I'm not seeing anything outstanding to suggest keeping. SwisterTwister talk 19:53, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- not sufficient publications or awards for WP:PROF, no other coverage. However, I do not see this as part of a promotional campaign (AGF). The author of the article created 28 articles of which at least 9 (nominator) or at least 14 (my count) are notable enough to not warrant AfD -- see User:Jcstanley/my articles for more discussion. -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 18:31, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep -- While his books are few in number, they look as if they might be quite significant in dealing with internal church administration and discipline. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:52, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 01:50, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

del no independent review neither the person nor his books. Staszek Lem (talk) 03:09, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as lacking notability. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:25, 21 December 2015 (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.