Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas McElwain (2nd nomination)

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. Cirt (talk) 10:34, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas McElwain

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

No references. Article has been around since 2006 or earlier. Bejinhan Talk 04:36, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. —Bejinhan Talk 04:38, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No sources. Miami33139 (talk) 05:01, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Question Since when do we delete articles for presently being unsourced? If the attempt is to send other editors fishing for sources it is a misuse of the AfD circuit. You must demonstrate that you have attempted some work yourself, per WP:BEFORE. Power.corrupts (talk) 11:18, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This AFD is not to send other editors running for references. The reason why I AFDed it is because I think that the article has been given enough chance and time and yet still fail to meet certain criteria. Bejinhan Talk 13:06, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have attempted some work myself. My attempt failed. How might I demonstrate that I attempted? -- Hoary (talk) 05:35, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How about deleting on notability grounds? I think that the bar has gone up since the first AFD. Polarpanda (talk) 11:32, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's possible. Bejinhan Talk 13:06, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Lack of sources is grounds for improvement, not deletion. Ghits shows sources exist. Edward321 (talk) 15:18, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I looked among the ghits. I didn't find reliable sources. Have you looked among the ghits? If so, where are the reliable sources? If not, please look for them. -- Hoary (talk) 05:33, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. To judge from what we read in the article, McElwain has a fascinating set of interests, and from my (rather than Wikipedia's) PoV he is hugely more noteworthy than are many people (reality show participants etc etc) that do get articles. However, I can find no sources, and I see no credible promise to get sources. If an article can't be sourced after a certain time, it goes. This one's had that time; it goes. ¶ I'll happily change my mind if sources are added; notify me on my talk page if I don't seem to have noticed. -- Hoary (talk) 10:59, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NW (Talk) 20:24, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for lack of sources, no real assertation of notability. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 20:30, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: non notable. MisterWiki talk ^{(SIGN/REVIEW)} 20:45, 3 December 2009 (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.