Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Darren Rovell
Source: 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 keep. By means of rationale, User:Omarcheeseboro and User:Cirt provide references that this newscaster's notability extends beyond WP:ONEEVENT, which was the substance of the nomination -- Samir 06:48, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Darren Rovell
- Darren Rovell (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable person who supposedly said something controversial. DCEdwards1966 21:18, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - While it certainly should be expanded beyond wp:oneevent, his bio on cnbc.com shows that he meets wp:creative. He's written books that have received recognition, worked for major networks and interviewed top sport figures.
- As for indepedent sources, NY Times blog cites and praises him, Book has praise on back cover (scroll to the bottom). Google searches now show a lot of blogs and stuff about Meb K., but the potential for establishing more notability is certainly there. --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 13:11, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Arbitrarily0 (talk) 01:29, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I wonder how many relatively unknown interviewers there are in the world, as the internet grows bigger it is possible to find one or two things about them on the WWW, but (imo) that doesn't make them notable enough to warrant a biography. Off2riorob (talk) 15:02, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Good deal of coverage in secondary sources news, web, academic sources, books. Cirt (talk) 20:43, 17 November 2009 (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.