Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Shortt (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. Sandstein 12:08, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

James Shortt

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Does not appear to meet WP:AUTHOR or any other notability guideline. Aside from gossip and tabloid sites (i.e., sites unsuitable for referencing a BLP), there are only passing mentions of the article subject in other sources. International Bodyguard Association is his own organization, and as such the references from IBA are unsuitable for establishing notability. Please note that BLP-violating material has been removed from this article. Risker (talk) 16:55, 13 February 2020 (UTC) Risker (talk) 16:55, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:46, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:47, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:47, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

:Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:48, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Subject is not notable and all sources appear to be unreliable, self-published, or otherwise from sources inappropriate to a BLP article. Notability fails WP:AUTHOR on multiple counts. Page appears to be an old attack page, created with no intention other than disparagement, that survived due to article subject's relative obscurity. Regarding prior AFD, the user who strong-armed keeping at that time has since been blocked for sock-puppetry.Legitimus (talk) 20:58, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment if Otfried Deubner satisfies WP:AUTHOR for 1 book (see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Otfried Deubner) then Shortt as author of 4 books must do so also. Mztourist (talk) 07:27, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Both linked AFD discussion and article suggest notability of Deubner was for far more than just authoring a single book. Also per WP:AUTHOR, its not the number of books published, but the significance of the book(s).Legitimus (talk) 18:20, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, that was the only basis for his notability, 1 book. Mztourist (talk) 12:13, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps this is not the best place to compare an article about a person with *no* significant reliable source references to one about an early 20th century academic whose work has been discussed and referenced by significantly more recent peers. It's really not about the number of books the article subject has written. Risker (talk) 22:11, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am making the point that the WP:AUTHOR criteria don't appear to be applied consistently.Mztourist (talk) 03:11, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep meets WP:AUTHOR. A search on Google Scholar gives these citations of Special Air Service: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=3691399119079748637&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en Mztourist (talk) 03:11, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I do not see Shortt's name or the title of his book when I click on that Google Scholar search, nor do I find him quoted or referred to in the google book links found there; you may have different results. What aspect of WP:AUTHOR does Shortt meet? Please be specific; there are four possible criteria, and I do not believe he meets any of them. Risker (talk) 07:17, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - 1 of WP:AUTHOR. Mztourist (talk) 09:06, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - That search doesn't seem to provide evidence to support that - David Gerard (talk) 11:11, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - closest he comes to notability is the Sun article, and that should frankly be removed - David Gerard (talk) 22:31, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I just removed it, I can't find those claims in any RS. While I understand people's concern over such claims, we really can't use the blog or forum information on this in a Wikipedia bio - David Gerard (talk) 22:35, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There's no evidence that he meets any of the notability criteria for authors and there doesn't seem to be any significant independent coverage of him. Brief mentions of changing claims he made about his military service do not qualify as meeting WP:GNG. Papaursa (talk) 02:59, 19 February 2020 (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.