Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nathan Pettijohn

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 17:44, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nathan Pettijohn

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Pettitjohn does not appear notable as either a talent manager or as an author. Sources are either poor quality (not RS, not significant coverage, or both of these things) or are about other notable people and not Pettijohn. No indication from BEFORE or from sources in the article (mostly to booksellers) that his book is notable and thus no claim to notability for NUATHOR. Barkeep49 (talk) 17:00, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Barkeep49 (talk) 17:00, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Barkeep49 (talk) 17:00, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Barkeep49 (talk) 17:00, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Wrote a book self-published on Amazon, but the book got ZERO attention in WP:RS so he fails WP:AUTHOR. The rest of his career fails WP:GNG for sheer death of sources. E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:06, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per sources cited in the article.Docor726 (talk) 19:16, 26 July 2019 (UTC)— Docor726 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

WP:DENY ——SerialNumber54129 12:04, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Docor726, which sources in the article do you feel establish notability? Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 19:23, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
the article has plenty of references so I voted keep. Docor726 (talk) 20:57, 26 July 2019 (UTC)?[reply]

First welcome to Wikipedia. I hope you find your time here productive. If you haven't already you might want to read WP:RS as it talks about how to identify reliable sources. Reliable sources are required to identify notability - the standard wikipedia uses for what can have an article. While an article can have a lot of references, if those references aren't reliable sources they don't help show notability. That's why I asked which sources provide notability. If you have questions about reliable sources and/or notability feel free to ask me on my talk page. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 21:03, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I have to agree with nominator and E.M.Gregory. The people he represents as a talent manager may be notable (Howroyd certainly is), but that doesn't contribute to notability for him. There are no reliable sources in the article that offer significant coverage of Pettijohn, and I failed to find any to add. Doesn't meet WP:GNG or WP:NAUTHOR. Schazjmd (talk) 16:18, 27 July 2019 (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.