Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John F. Wolfe

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. This is plaguarised rather then a direct copyvio but its clearly a rewrite from the same text so best start over. No objection to this being recreated from scratch Spartaz ^Humbug! 19:28, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

John F. Wolfe

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

Quite questionable on WP:N; no inline citations and limited references. Creator has a possible WP:COI as well. mono 04:45, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:59, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:59, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete. One independent source doesn't hit WP:GNG for me. If more can be found I'll reconsider. Nuttah (talk) 11:20, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 00:11, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Owner and publisher of a major newspaper and head of a communications company makes this a public figure of note and an easy call. Carrite (talk) 01:43, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep Not a ton of coverage, but significant, including a profile in the Columbia Journalism Review, graduation speaker at OSU, etc. --MelanieN (talk) 01:37, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:26, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Second relist rationale. The article is a BLP. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:27, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I had intended to close this debate as "no consensus", but on checking the article's history I discovered that it's a copyvio of this. Therefore I must !vote rather than close. Delete as copyvio.—S Marshall T/C 16:17, 20 June 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.