Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim Rogers (writer) (2nd nomination)

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. Courcelles (talk) 00:32, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tim Rogers (writer)

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

Nominating on the request of an IP editor. From talk page This bio has been deleted before. It appears to be an autobiography of a writer of no particular notability. His band is unknown and plays at "pay for play" bars. The references are all to the blogs or web site that he has contributed to. The author has only contributed to this page. 203.216.0.150. I'm neutral at this time. Ron Ritzman (talk) 22:22, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- Ron Ritzman (talk) 22:23, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Ron Ritzman (talk) 22:23, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: no coverage in RS, fails WP:BIO. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 22:35, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, appears in at least three outside sources [1] [2] [3] and there's really nothing to support the claim that the article is a conflict of interest since it clearly includes criticisms of his work. The previous AFD was in 2006, so it stands to reason that he's gained a little more notability since then. Axem Titanium (talk) 23:10, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- COMMENTThe Guardian blog is tangential and somethingawful and gamesetwatch don't meet RS. Honestly if that's the best you can do I'm tempted to tag this argument as supporting deletion. Spartaz ^Humbug! 23:40, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reply - Actually, Game Set Watch is a reliable source, as noted here --Teancum (talk) 12:17, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete haven't done a thorough search yet, but the three sources up above w/ the possible exception of the guardian aren't suitable for wikipedia (something awful? c'mon). Given that this is a BLP and devotes an inordinate amount of time to how much he apparently sucks, we should be quite a bit more strict with regard to sourcing. I'll be back w/ a more solid statement after a search. Protonk (talk) 23:35, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. (Search video game sources) Axem Titanium (talk) 00:48, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Nothing notable about him. Looks like an autobiography to me even with the sucks comments. There are lots of writers with a similar amount of notability, and there are thousands of independent bands of no particular note. Brettr (talk) 06:44, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Self-fellatory autobiography of a non-notable blog writer. Simon-in-sagamihara (talk) 11:28, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, getting called out by Zack Parsons is not in itself a claim to notability. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 12:27, 3 August 2010 (UTC).[reply]
Delete though I consider GameSetWatch borderline reliable as, with Gamasutra, falls under the same umbrella of Game Developer magazine. But there has to be other stuff that's (more) reliable out there in order for me to be comfortable with it. –MuZemike 02:41, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; sources are not reliable enough to pass WP:BIO. Ironholds (talk) 22:58, 5 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.