Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marcus B. Nash

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. No opposition to deletion in three weeks. Michig (talk) 07:36, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Marcus B. Nash[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)

Non-notable subject that does not meet WP:BASIC:

Various source searches for independent, significant coverage in reliable sources are only providing brief passing mentions, name checks, quotations and quotations of the subject acting as a spokesperson (the latter two of which are primary in nature, and do not establish notability).
Said brief passing mentions primarily consist of routine coverage of the subject's duties, providing almost no actual biographical coverage or significant coverage.
The article is almost entirely reliant upon primary sources. Seven of the eight sources are primary, and while the Deseret Morning News 2008 Church Almanac presumably provides some coverage, multiple, independent reliable sources that provide significant coverage are required, not just one. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:43, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:43, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:43, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:43, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 18:07, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 07:39, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as consensus is that LDS leaders have to pass WP:GNG or one of the SNGs, and this subject does not. The article's sources are not independent (Liahona, Church News, lds.org, and the Almanac that says Deseret News but is actually assembled by Church News staff), not reliable ("Grampa Bill"), or not actually about the subject ("Joseph Smith Papers" page). Routine coverage of church events and quotes without analysis do not add up to significant coverage of this subject. So, not notable under Wikipedia guidelines. Open to reconsideration if significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources emerges. Bakazaka (talk) 21:11, 16 December 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.