Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim Hitchner

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 redirect to Brocket 99. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:28, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tim Hitchner[edit]

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

This biography of a deceased Canadian broadcaster lacks reliable sourcing and a significant claim to notability. Unreliable sources include reviews on Amazon written by subject, dead links to insignificant contributions/mentions in community newspaper, a private-access wordpress fansite for an underground audiotape offensive to some due to its racist humor. Does not pass notability criteria for WP:CREATIVE, WP:ENTERTAINER or WP:PERP (for his dangerous-driving-causing death conviction). Sole claim to fame for contributing to the underground tape is already more than adequately recognized in the Brocket 99 article which has been repeatedly abused by fans and the tape’s owner. The creator of the article deleted a prod shortly after it was added and has only ever contributed to the bio and the Brocket 99 article Canuckle (talk) 20:26, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification: the deletion prod cited above was about reliable-sourcing requirement for bio of a living person. The article was created a year after subject's death. Canuckle (talk) 20:43, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Canuckle (talk) 20:50, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 01:32, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 01:32, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 01:32, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The bulk of this article is found in Brocket 99. As mentioned above, the coverage of his notability is sufficient in the Brocket 99 article. —Kmsiever (talk) 22:56, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Poorly sourced article about a person of minimal (at best) independent notability; mentioning his name in Brocket 99 is all we really need. Bearcat (talk) 16:51, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Brocket 99. Not sufficiently notable for a standalone article, but plausible enough a search term. --BDD (talk) 21:32, 16 August 2013 (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.