Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jim P. Slaton (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 keep. (X! · talk) · @666 · 14:58, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jim P. Slaton[edit]

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

This biography doesn't make much of a claim of notability and I haven't been able to find significant coverage of this person in third-party sources. There are quite a number of primary sources within the article but without any tertiary sources the article is original research. Them From Space 03:34, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - no GNews, GBooks, etc hits. Article was last edited by 'canopypiloting' - which is connected to the subject of the article. No reliable sources of notability. (GregJackP (talk) 21:46, 15 February 2010 (UTC))[reply]

KEEP Why is wikipedia so hard to use and why is it so hard to write an article about a real successful guy who has made HUGE contributions to his industry? I don't understand the comments left on the article Jim P. Slaton, what do you mean "been able to find significant coverage of this person in third-party sources"? What do you consider a third party source? Jesus, this guys is everywhere online and come up either #1 or #2 organically in Google, Yahoo and Bing. We would spend ten more hours submitting and rewriting the article if we knew exactly what we were suppose to write. Is this website wanting good content or are you in the business of deleting hours of work? Simply tell us what to do and we will do it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Canopypiloting (talk • contribs) 01:33, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep* The information about Jim P. Slaton might not look the best but it is accurate. 01:37, 16 February 2010 (UTC)AerialHistorian (talk)

Keep Last time I said weak keep, . But I finally did figure out how to find some good references in GNews: [1] including a NYTimes source for "Jim Slaton is the founder of the Pro Swooping Tour, a professional league. " [2] . Now all that is necessary is to rewrite the article. The editors above ask how, so I did a first pass at it: next step is to read and use the external sources to give references for the various parts of the career. As I also found the refs for them, they can take it from there. DGG ( talk ) 05:44, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, (X! · talk) · @237 · 04:40, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weak, weak keep since I am not at all convinced of the notability of this "industry," despite the clamor made above. The NYT article provided by DGG actually suggests this lack of importance, since it points out that in 2008 the Pro Swooping Tour only had one event per year. Anyway, I trimmed the article some. I see great problems verifying much of the information, and I added all I could find--I could vote delete just as easily here, I think. Drmies (talk) 05:38, 22 February 2010 (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.