Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vic Miles

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. Similar to the recent Peter Hood Ballantine Cumming DRV, the major point of contention here is whether a obit in the NY Times is sufficient to establish notability. It's unclear from the comments left by the keep camp, how much weight they put on the obit itself, and how much on the other coverage. But, in any case, the preponderance of opinion is that there's not enough here to establish WP:N. -- RoySmith (talk) 21:03, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Vic Miles

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

Lack of significant coverage. Miles had a full career, but merely having a job on TV doesn't make you notable. Probably a wonderful person, but I don't see where he passes WP:JOURNALIST. Niteshift36 (talk) 19:06, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:NBIO. Just having a job on TV is not enough to be in encyclopedia. Also WP:NOTOBITUARY. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 20:06, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As above - fails WP:NBIO Deathlibrarian (talk) 22:55, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 01:11, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 01:11, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 01:11, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Subject of a written obituary in The New York Times (not a self submitted obit but an actual journalist written obituary). Winner of several journalism awards. Satisfies WP:N and WP:JOURNALIST in my opinion.4meter4 (talk) 22:32, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A NYT obit doesn't establish notability. If he weren't a local figure, the case may be a little stronger, but big as the NYT is, it still covers local news too. And he shared some local Emmys Niteshift36 (talk) 16:46, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Somewhat borderline but the assertions from tge NYT obit and the extent of coverage seem to me to be enough. FloridaArmy (talk) 23:03, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NYT obits don't establish notability. Niteshift36 (talk) 16:46, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete regional emmies do not add towards notability, nor does anything else here.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:09, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 10:15, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 10:15, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The existence of an obituary in The New York Times is not an automatic inclusion freebie in and of itself, particularly for a person whose notability claim is located inside the NYT's local coverage area. It certainly points at the potential for notability if more sources could be shown than just the obituary itself, but the obit does not singlehandedly confer a magic pass of WP:GNG as an article's only source. Bearcat (talk) 21:38, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- a nn news anchor. Does not meet WP:ANYBIO & the obit is not an automatic pass in and of itself; there should be other sources available. Lacks WP:SIGCOV and Wikipedia is not a tribute site. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:20, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep- I think if the New York Times thinks he is notable enough to have an obit article, then he's clearly notable. Would be good if more RS was added. Deathlibrarian (talk) 06:13, 18 January 2018 (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.