Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andy Brassell

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. Google hits are not a showing of notability, and independent sourcing has not been shown. Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 17:17, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Andy Brassell[edit]

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

Unnotable football journalist. Only references are to work he has written and an interview with himself. RealDealBillMcNeal (talk) 22:44, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -Fimatic (talk | contribs) 02:35, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. -Fimatic (talk | contribs) 02:35, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:26, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:26, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:27, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Passes WP:GNG due to significant coverage in the media. 36,700 google hits and 814 recent google news hits. IJA (talk) 16:34, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Does he pass that? One of the criteria is "Independent of the subject". The entirety of the first ten pages are either journalist index pages or articles he has wrote. There's no disputing he is a journalist, but how is he notable? RealDealBillMcNeal (talk) 16:53, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Quotes from a subject and articles by a subject (short of the Prof Test) are explicitly debarred from supporting the notability of the subject. Anyone got any reliable sources discussing the subject in significant detail? Haven't found any. Nha Trang ^Allons! 20:15, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Walton (talk) 00:15, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e decker ^talk 03:24, 23 December 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.