Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marc Fennell

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. JohnCD (talk) 18:21, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Marc Fennell[edit]

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

I believe that this article is irrelevant and redundant as per applicability criteria as the subject of the article is quite simply not notable or appropriate enough to have his own article on Wikipedia.--Topclaw (talk) 02:30, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. -- -- Lear's Fool (talk | contribs) 07:33, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- -- Lear's Fool (talk | contribs) 07:34, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. He seems to me to meet all of the WP:NOTABILITY criteria, so I think the article should stay. Mitch Ames (talk) 13:01, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep The numerous independent references and the fact that this individual has a major role on several nationally-broadcast television and radio programs belie any claims on lack of notability, as well as your "belief" of irrelevance. --Canley (talk) 06:27, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Most of the references to be found are now in the article (thanks to Bilby (talk · contribs)), but I think it would be generous to describe their coverage as significant. However, as Canley (talk · contribs) says, Fennell has a major role on a number of nationally broadcast television and radio programs, which, combined with the references, is sufficient to establish notability. This is a solidly referenced stub about someone with national television exposure, there is certainly no good reason to delete it. -- Lear's Fool (talk | contribs) 07:55, 12 May 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.