Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rob Ager

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. Davewild (talk) 19:01, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rob Ager[edit]

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

Subject is not notable. I am the article’s original creator but from the outset others have complained of non-notability and I now agree. At the time I underestimated just how commonplace this type of researcher is amongst Kubrick film fandom, and more notable researchers (eg those in the film Room 237) don’t have Wikipedia articles. Subject is already generously covered at Interpretations of 2001: A Space Odyssey and The_Shining_(film)#Spatial_layout_of_the_Overlook_Hotel. Silent Key (talk) 18:56, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Ager's work is not published by mainstream journals. Not really notable enough for his own article.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 19:24, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. per nom. Ormr2014 | Talk
Speedy Delete per WP:CSD#G7. Shrillpicc100 (talk) 00:54, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:41, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:42, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:42, 16 May 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.