Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David E. Shaner

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. Tone 15:01, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

David E. Shaner[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

I am unable to find any coverage in reliable sources to indicate that WP:BIO, WP:AUTHOR or WP:PROF are met. This is the most recent version of the article prior to copyvio blanking. This book review is the best independent source I can find. SmartSE (talk) 13:42, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. PRehse (talk) 13:59, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment If the aforementioned link is indeed the latest copy of this biography, I see no significant coverage of him in independent reliable sources. Most of the sources are by him and the others don't appear independent. Papaursa (talk) 22:06, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this and also the following draft:

Notability in either the article or the draft is no more than marginal, and both are non-neutral and promotional. If the promotional language were cleaned out, the resulting stub would not be sufficient to be worth keeping. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:33, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - It doesn't appear possible to bundle an MFD and an AFD, so the AFD should govern. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:42, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I agree with Robert McClenon up to the point of saying -essentially- that stubs are "not worthy".There are lots of stub articles. I will add that I asked Ptarry to parse the article if need be, in numerous posts about rewriting the article to conform to WP standards. This could still be done, but as it stands now, it does not conform. Not to discourage Ptarry from resubmitting when and if they get a handle on WP editing SOP. Hamster Sandwich (talk) 01:24, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:Hamster Sandwich - Some stubs are worthy, and some are not. If the stub contains enough information to identify notability, especially ipso facto notability, the stub is worthy. Not all stubs are worthy, and I meant that this one would not be worthy. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:55, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

delete I looked at both the latest version of the article and the draft. Lots of puffery ("world class skier", "internationally recognized martial artist") but no evidence he's notable as a skier (WP:NSPORTS) or martial artist (WP:MANOTE). I didn't find the coverage necessary to show he meets WP:NAUTHOR or the GNG. References are by him or not independent. I think the draft is the better article but I don't see that he meets any notability standards.Sandals1 (talk) 15:05, 26 January 2019 (UTC) Looks like a duck to me[reply]
Delete pure advertising. DGG ( talk ) 01:16, 28 January 2019 (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.