Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jim Couper
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 delete. Jayjg (talk) 01:27, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Jim Couper
- Jim Couper (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Asserts notability but sources are almost nonexistant. Another user tried to nominate it but didn't finish the process, leaving me as the ONLY PERSON ON THE WHOLE WIKI who can finish redlinked nominations. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 21:29, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Turns out the original nominator, Protector of Wiki, miscapitalized. Their rationale was "Non-notable!! The only source aside from his website is from the publisher. The alleged
ly"Bibliography" section is not a list of sources, but a list of the subject's books! Also, was previously deleted in 2006 as A7!" Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 21:46, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply] - Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:40, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Non-notable per WP:AUTHOR. Lacks reliable secondary sources to establish notability. Uncle Dick (talk) 17:51, 25 August 2010 (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.