Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kyle Marlett

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. Yunshui ^雲 _水 08:59, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kyle Marlett[edit]

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

The sources currently cited are poor. We need some coverage in a more reliable source to satisfy WP:BIO SmartSE (talk) 00:41, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Yet another poor magician WP:RESUME article. We need a new policy, possibly titled WP:NOTYOURMAGICCV because these badly-written magician articles keep popping up like rabbits out of a hat. Nate • (chatter) 01:05, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 08:46, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:09, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete The best source I could find was this interview with the local fox affiliate. The iTricks piece is somewhat interesting but not reliable enough to use. An weak argument could be made about Marlett passing WP:NCREATIVE as an important figure, but I think that while he is widely known, that criteria should be reserved for significantly more important figures.

/* Kyle Marlett */ Added more criteria and articles. I suggest keeping the page. He is a world renown magician who has appeared on countless TV shows.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.82.159.81 (talk • contribs)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Magic-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:26, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete an over-the-top promotional page, totally lacking in encyclopedic tone.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:05, 15 June 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.