Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ryan Radbyrne

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. Mz7 (talk) 20:38, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ryan Radbyrne

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

Basically this is viral advertising for the subject's book. There is no online information on him other than in the couple of barely good enough articles which comment on the lack of information out there about him. Clever promotion, but not really Wikipedia worthy yet, his book might be if it actually does get coverage out of this but the book does not seem to pass notability either, I'm not seeing many (if any) independent reviews or coverage. Mabalu (talk) 09:01, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete - author possibly fails WP:CSD#A7, book definitely fails WP:NBOOK. DrStrauss talk 09:10, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:10, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:10, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete no sources to show notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:47, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete nothing more than WP:SPAM. Bearian (talk) 04:41, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom and above editors. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:39, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete annoying promo bullsh*t - we should not be helping them out with their ad campaign. I suppose - and I say this with heavy heart - if at some time in the future it becomes truly notable, either because of the book or because of the campaign - "Council sues book promotors over vandalism" or whatever - then we might have to cover it. Till then, please not. DBaK (talk) 20:29, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete. Any notability obviously comes from individuals or organizations that have a stake in this book's success. We shouldn't set a precedent where to be considered notable, all you have to do is print up a bunch of stickers and vandalize public areas with them. City Of Silver 20:33, 1 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.