Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Poole

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. Kurykh (talk) 00:37, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

James Poole (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)

No evidence of notability. Some of the places he worked and some of the games he worked on are notable, but that does not mean that every employee who worked on those games is also notable. Guy Macon (talk) 13:25, 3 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: as nominator. --Guy Macon (talk) 05:45, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete No evidence of notability Neiltonks (talk) 17:05, 3 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Poole is well known in the industry and was a significant contributor to many classic games, as well as supplying this insight into the rise and fall of Ion Storm — Preceding unsigned comment added by OldSchoolVideoGames (talk • contribs) 11:11, 4 March 2017 (UTC) [reply]

• WP:GNG says "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list. "Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material." Do you have any sources that meet those requirements? -Guy Macon (talk) 13:39, 5 March 2017‎ (UTC)[reply]
• Vague anecdotes usually aren't worth much in these discussions. Do you have any third party sources that discuss him in detail? Sergecross73 msg me 14:11, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 08:28, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:40, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Almost entirely unsourced BLP. Even if sources are found, a WP:TNT would probably be in order, as the article in no way resembles an encyclopedic article. For starters, over half of the article consists of a direct quote from him from a messageboard... Sergecross73 msg me 03:29, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Per the comments by Serge. GamerPro64 01:32, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - No evidence of notability per WP:GNG. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 21:04, 25 March 2017 (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.