Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Philip Austin Brooks

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:02, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Philip Austin Brooks

[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)

No evidence of any actual notability: sources are all databases or primary sources, and Google News only returns press releases, no actual news reports about him. Fram (talk) 08:51, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Sportspeople, Basketball, and Texas. Fram (talk) 08:51, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Lacks the significant coverage to pass WP:GNG. Alvaldi (talk) 13:50, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, unfortunately either the subject or the paid contributor has engaged in extensive paid placement in fake SEO "newspapers" and in low-rent press release re-printers to promote a daycare business. I didn't see anything in earned media. This seems related to Draft:Little Butterflies, another paid editor, and more SEO spam. That leaves just a few casual statlines for some basketball gigs. Sam Kuru (talk) 16:13, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete These SEO articles are a pain in the behind. We aren't here to help you promote your xyz thing. I don't see anything about this individual in RS. Oaktree b (talk) 21:11, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Don't Delete the article cites reputable sources from well-known websites based on reliable, published sources. As contributor I declare that I got personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. User:Proeminente (talk) 08:38, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Proeminente Unfortunately the article doesn't cite sources of significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. All the sources in the article are either database sites or trivial mentions in minor articles. Alvaldi (talk) 11:26, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No significant coverage in reliable sources. The aforementioned database links, press releases, and trivial mentions are not evidence of notability. --Kinu ^t/_c 06:37, 30 November 2022 (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.