Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Russ George
- 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 no consensus. Sandstein 20:55, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
Russ George[edit]
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Russ George (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Has been the source of some dispute, but when you dig deeper there's not really any significant coverage that suggests notability. Subject does not meet WP:NBASIC. ––FormalDude talk 13:32, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. ––FormalDude talk 13:32, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. ––FormalDude talk 13:32, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. ––FormalDude talk 13:32, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. ––FormalDude talk 13:32, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 16:18, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- I'm not very familiar with notability guidelines, but do this and this satisfy WP:NBASIC? Generalissimo Store (talk) 05:13, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- @Generalissimo Store: The first one does easily–I'll add it to the article. The second one, however, is an interview, so it is not independent and therefore does not count towards notability. ––FormalDude talk 05:39, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- I took a look at most of the sources listed by WP:RSP as reliable, and a lot of them seem to have articles about George. 1 2 3 4 are about George's Haida experiment. 5 6 7 are also about it, but they seem a bit opinionated, and 8 explicitly references The Guardian in an earlier article about the subject. 9 is about an event instigated by George which is unrelated to the iron experiment, and 10 is an investigative article which seems to cover a great deal of George's career but does not come from a listed perennial source. Are any of these worth adding? Generalissimo Store (talk) 03:39, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- On first glance it looks like some of those are worth adding. I'll take a deeper look as soon as I have some more time. ––FormalDude talk 20:14, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- I've added those sources as they are reliable, but I'm still not sure that this article passes WP:BLP1E. ––FormalDude talk 20:18, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
- Would an added section on the Vatican Climate Forest (another initiative created by George) allow the article to pass that test? Generalissimo Store (talk) 21:31, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
- That would certainly help. ––FormalDude talk 21:42, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
- Would an added section on the Vatican Climate Forest (another initiative created by George) allow the article to pass that test? Generalissimo Store (talk) 21:31, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
- I took a look at most of the sources listed by WP:RSP as reliable, and a lot of them seem to have articles about George. 1 2 3 4 are about George's Haida experiment. 5 6 7 are also about it, but they seem a bit opinionated, and 8 explicitly references The Guardian in an earlier article about the subject. 9 is about an event instigated by George which is unrelated to the iron experiment, and 10 is an investigative article which seems to cover a great deal of George's career but does not come from a listed perennial source. Are any of these worth adding? Generalissimo Store (talk) 03:39, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- @Generalissimo Store: The first one does easily–I'll add it to the article. The second one, however, is an interview, so it is not independent and therefore does not count towards notability. ––FormalDude talk 05:39, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:34, 14 March 2022 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:27, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
- Merge to Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation. Most of the information in this article is duplicative and is either not significant or not independent.Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:48, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 19:43, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
- 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.