Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daren Streblow

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. -- RoySmith (talk) 03:47, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Daren Streblow (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable performer; requires significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. References provided either only mention performer or do not satisfy WP:RS/WP:GNG. In the month since PROD was removed, only sources added have been links to Amazon items and Streblow's official website, neither of which are independent of subject or significant coverage. -- Wikipedical (talk) 06:09, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Leaning delete Comment - After news and book source searches, I found this paywalled article that appears to consist of significant coverage (sigcov), but not finding more sigcov. Additional reliable sources (e.g. [1]) are only providing passing mentions. Appears to possibly not meet WP:BASIC for a standalone Wikipedia article. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:34, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Struck parts of my !vote per more sources found on Highbeam by User:Leghari k. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:53, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. From the reference list in the article: an interview with an independent organisation and some coverage of his radio show. The latter doesn't seem to be just a PR release (Googling for a Streblow quote from it gets exactly one hit) and the site seems to exercise editorial selectiveness. Facing the Sky (talk) 16:01, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • One can hardly make a case for notability from citing sites called Family Life Ministries and RBR.com, which are not quite reliable sources. There would be no problem with mainstream news sites referencing Streblow, but none exist. -- Wikipedical (talk) 17:40, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:08, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:08, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:08, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. There are sufficient references in article (could definitely be improved further). Leghari k (talk) 12:21, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • There aren't sufficient references in the article, as I pointed out. There are only non-independent sources (links to his website, Amazon product listings) or hyper-local/questionably reliable sources. There is no coverage of him in any major news source. -- Wikipedical (talk) 20:01, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• A quick search about Daren Streblow on Google SERP offers some 32k pages (which in turn links back to this page as well). A query on HighBeam Research returned mentions from the like of NYT, you can try some coverage of Daren on paper. Here are two articles about him on NewsWire and StarTribune, none referenced in article yet, though. There is some considerable Traffic comming to this article as well. Also subject is not failing WP:SPIP in any case. Leghari k (talk) 13:31, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Update. Found some more references about Daren apparently from third party sources covering comedy, as on freetolaugh.org, rooftopcomedy, dove.org and laughright. Working on to place these references (and the ones in my previous post) to the Daren's article. Leghari k (talk) 10:13, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Daren Streblow is very well known and respected in the comedy community, and a favorite with teenagers all over the USA. The projects in which he has been involved, some as a headliner, have received significant coverage. I would hate to seem him penalized for not aggressively pursuing aggrandizement with public relations activities. Dickshunary (talk) 14:18, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Where is that significant coverage you mention? So far, every mention is either promotional or in an extremely local source that fails WP:RS. If you can show significant coverage of him, then please add it to the article. But in the meantime, the article fails WP:N. -- Wikipedical (talk) 20:01, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per new sources found by Leghari k, and bravo for taking the initiative to find those. GRUcrule (talk) 19:25, 2 April 2014 (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.