Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mike Russell (radio presenter)

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. Rlendog (talk) 03:51, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Russell (radio presenter)

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

unremarkable radio personality. References show local coverage but not much beyond there. Broadcasting record is trivial. Promotional article largely edited by the subject of the article himself, when COI concerns were raised, highly suspect WP:SPAs cropped up. RadioFan (talk) 03:24, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. --Mais oui! (talk) 04:47, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. —Mais oui! (talk) 04:48, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. Mais oui! (talk) 04:49, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:21, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Alpha_Quadrant ^(talk) 15:45, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Appears to meet wp:notability. Needs wikifying. Has peacock and promotional type wording. North8000 (talk) 16:11, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 18:29, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Can you expand on how you see this meeting WP:N, specically the concerns about the amount of minor local coverage and lack of significant, coverage in more depth than just passing mentions.--RadioFan (talk) 23:35, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - no significant coverage in sources that are reliable and unrelated to the subject, and once we remove the promotional fluff there is nothing left. VQuakr (talk) 02:13, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not notable. Google search finds this Wikipedia article as the top hit, and the remainder a bunch of social media sites. Google News Archive finds one hyper-local article about his marathon broadcast, and a bunch of articles about other people named Mike Russell. --MelanieN (talk) 01:17, 11 February 2012 (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.