Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A. Roger Merrill

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. Ad Orientem (talk) 03:44, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A. Roger Merrill

[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)

Several source searches indicate that this subject does not meet WP:BASIC notability. RS coverage consists only of meager passing mentions, name checks and brief quotations, none of which establish notability. The article is entirely dependent upon primary sources, which also do not confer notability. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:59, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:00, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Utah-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:00, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:00, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I really don't know why there are so many Latter-day Saints bio's on wikipedia and a lot of them don't pass basic WP:GNG guidelines like this one. Northamerica1000 Maybe you can group them together into one AfD when you find them? Govvy (talk) 12:14, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Govvy: While many of these bios were obviously created because the subjects became LDS leaders, the subjects themselves can have different possible notability claims besides being LDS leaders, so nominating them all together would be a WP:TRAINWRECK. Bakazaka (talk) 19:24, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 17:37, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Per nom. Multiple AFD nominations can be challenging but if articles are primary self-sourced like this one I would imagine easier. Otr500 (talk) 00:16, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per nom. Britishfinance (talk) 00:18, 14 February 2019 (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.