Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Graeme Johnston

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.--Kubigula (talk) 17:27, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Graeme Johnston

While the dictionary he edited might be notable (it's a red link but not sure if it was never created or deleted), I don't find any evidence that he is. A search is hard due to an apparently common name, but an attempt at refining didn't provide much. I know that authors pass if their book has been covered widely in outside sources, but I'm not sure the same applies to an editor. Also the edition doesn't appear to have received widespread coverage, and it's unclear whether he worked on any other. Travellingcari (talk) 19:19, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I started the article over a year ago. I didn't have any more on him than what I put into the article. If he were notable, you'd think the article might have grown. Let him go. J ɪ m p 07:19, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, jonny-m t 16:02, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This is just a publisher of a dictionary that dosen't even have it's own article. Also hasn't grown in over a year. STORMTRACKER 94 ^{Go Sox!} 16:17, 20 February 2008 (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.