Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joel Magnuson

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. Cirt (talk) 11:46, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Joel Magnuson[edit]

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

Prod removed by IP, apparently in bad faith (huh?). No reliable sources to establish notability of an individual. For instance, no reviews of the book or the individual found in NYT or other large papers, Google Scholar was pretty thin. tedder (talk) 04:38, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - The relevant standards are WP:N and WP:AUTHOR. Regarding WP:N, while I can find plenty of passing mentions of Magnuson's existence, activities, and book, I can't find anything that might constitute "significant" coverage of him in a reliable, independent source. Looking at WP:AUTHOR, criteria (1) and (2) would seem to be relevant and at this stage Magnuson falls short of being "regarded as an important figure", "widely cited", or "known for originating a significant new concept". He's verging on it, so no prejudice against recreation once more sources turn up. - DustFormsWords (talk) 05:09, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This is the most extensive discussion of the subject's work, and that's not from a very reliable source. Drmies (talk) 05:42, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this person. Joe Chill (talk) 16:06, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:23, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:48, 26 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.