Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shane Bettenhausen

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 nominator withdrawal.[1] (non-administrative closure) -- RyRy (talk) 02:06, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shane Bettenhausen[edit]

Okay, so I think Shane's a great writer, but this article just isn't working. It has no sources, and I haven't been able to find any to use. Moreso, the article is rampant with in-jokes and unsourced "facts". I don't see this article growing beyond a stub anytime soon. Rwiggum (^Talk/_Contrib) 12:34, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related deletion discussions. Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 12:46, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, fails WP:BIO. Movingboxes (talk) 13:39, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, just because the article isn't sourced yet doesn't mean it isn't possible to source it. The single in-joke in the article can be factually verified by listening to him speak on any podcast from the last sixth months, as stated, if those count as a source for wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.240.44.36 (talk) 15:32, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I've looked, and I just can't find any sources that would suggest that he is notable as per WP:BIO. I'll absolutely support you and say that he is fairly notable among professional enthusiasts, and I'm actually a big fan of his. Unfortunately, I just haven't found enough to suggest that he passes WP:BIO. Oh, and as for the in-joke, there are multiple problems. For one, it's original research. Unless there is a source that specifically talks ABOUT his use of the catchphrase, it isn't a valid addition to the article. But more importantly, if there isn't even enough content to make the article more than a basic stub, I don't see why we need inside jokes making up a significant portion of the article. Rwiggum (^Talk/_Contrib) 22:31, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Primary sources can be used in an article. They don't do much of anything for notability, but WP:V is okay with them. Hobit (talk) 14:38, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There's a whole CNN article where he seems to be basically interviewed here. In addition he's quoted in the news a lot (155 total, about 20 seem to be articles by him, so that's about 130 quotes). [2]. Some of these include very short bios. Looks notable, but only just. Hobit (talk) 13:39, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawn. Thanks for finding those, Hobit. The article needs a TON of work, but those articles do indeed provide notability. Rwiggum (^Talk/_Contrib) 13:42, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Google news is your friend. Hobit (talk) 14:36, 29 August 2008 (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.