Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jon Abbott

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 keep. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:59, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jon Abbott

[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)

Not notable; sources are not independent reliable and with in depth coverage of the subject. Driodr (talk) 18:04, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Radio, Television, Education, and Massachusetts. Skynxnex (talk) 18:30, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Although Abbott isn't who would typically be measured by NACADEMIC, his American Academy of Arts and Sciences membership would qualify him under those measures. matt91486 (talk) 11:14, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep as per criteria three of NACADEMIC: "The person has been an elected member of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society or association (e.g., a National Academy of Sciences or the Royal Society) or a fellow of a major scholarly society which reserves fellow status as a highly selective honor (e.g., Fellow of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers)." He is a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, which is a prestigious scholarly association. However, he's not exactly an academic but I think those rules should still apply. Nevertheless, he had some independent coverage from The Boston Globe and Deadline Hollywood. CatchedY (talk) 15:08, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:15, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Passes criteria 3 of WP:NACADEMIC.4meter4 (talk) 20:26, 17 October 2022 (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.