Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rondrick Williamson

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. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:14, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rondrick Williamson

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

WP:BLP, shading into advertorial territory, of a person with no strong claim to passing any of Wikipedia's notability criteria. Further, this relies entirely on primary sources (his own website, the website of a TV show he was directly involved in, press releases, a commercial sales profile for his book), with not one shred of real coverage in real reliable sources. His involvement as a recurring guest on a nationally syndicated television talk show could potentially be a valid claim of notability if the article were sourced properly, but does not entitle him to keep a primary-sourced advertisement (and he was never one of the show's regular hosts, so it doesn't constitute a "get out of WP:GNG free" pass.) In addition, there's evidence that article creator User:VaNorris has a conflict of interest of some sort — the attached photo is listed as a corporate publicity photo, with the "source" in the file summary listed as "sent to me via email". No prejudice against recreation in the future if a good version citing good sources can be created, but this version needs to be deleted per WP:NUKEANDPAVE. Bearcat (talk) 15:04, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:56, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:56, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:56, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I just ran a more thorough check through Google than I did before, this time eliminating results that matched a key phrase from the bio on his own website, and found nothing useful for WP:BIO purposes. I thought a couple of the sources given in the article looked acceptable, but the one in the Southwest Oklahoma news site, I just saw, only mentions him in connection with a local event. At most this one could be OK, but it certainly isn't enough. —Largo Plazo (talk) 17:02, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Lacks significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Plus, article seems a bit too promotional for an encyclopedia.-- danntm ^T _C 17:22, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:BIO and lacks reliable sources.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 18:42, 25 September 2014 (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.