Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steuart Campbell
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. Kimchi.sg 10:50, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Suspected breach of WP:AUTO Guinnog 10:16, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Very weak keep. WP:AUTO is not a deletion criterion, and Mr. Campbell might barely meet WP:BIO: 91k Google hits[1], some of which seem to consider him a kind of expert when it comes to paranormal phenomena, and one of his books has been cited
a couple timesonce[2] in a journal. I have no experience in this area, so I can't vouch for the quality of this journal. — Kaustuv Chaudhuri @ 10:31, July 8, 2006- Comment: Made a mistake with the Google Scholar link above. He only has one citation. — Kaustuv Chaudhuri @ 10:37, July 8, 2006
- Comment Definately WP:AUTO, however, he has had 4 books published, listed at Barnes & Noble and Amazon, so a complete re-write might be preferable to a delete. --Richhoncho 10:33, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Sam Blanning(talk) 19:41, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisters' comment: I was prepared to close this as delete on the basis that the only keep is "very weak", and WP:AUTO is almost always a very strong reason for deletion (I set great store by the rule of thumb that if someone's notable, they won't need to create their own article), making deletion uncontroversial. However, the article has one backlink - to Rendlesham Forest Incident - albeit added by an anonymous IP, [3], so the edit may or may not have also come from Mr Campbell. (*edit* Correction: the mention of the name was added by an IP, Bluewave bluelinked it. [4]) Bottom line, this needs more than two/three pairs of eyes. --Sam Blanning(talk) 19:41, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Further comment. I notice that one of his books is listed as a source for Chinook Helicopter Crash (1994), and more importantly by another person apparently.
I am still not enthusiastic enough to make a call either way. --Richhoncho 19:52, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
User:80.192.18.180 is presumably Mr Campbell himself; it was after I noticed the user adding references to his own books to several articles on my watchlist and challenged him on it that he set up his present account. --Guinnog 20:00, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks to Guinnog's information I can change my call to delete with a clear conscience. --Richhoncho 20:11, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as non-notable bio/vanity. Ifnord 20:28, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Vanity.--Runcorn 21:29, 19 July 2006 (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.