Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nick Adams (commentator)

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 keep as WP:SNOW. This nomination doesn't seem to have a snowball's chance in hell to pass. There is a consensus that the subject meets WP:GNG. (non-admin closure) MrClog (talk) 20:25, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Adams (commentator)

[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)

fails WP:BIO, WP:AUTHOR for his book and commentating career. fails WP:NPOL, he was deputy mayor of a small municipality in Sydney (which is in fact now defunct LibStar (talk) 02:47, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2019 May 9. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:13, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:33, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:33, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:33, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There is already enough good sources in the article to satisfy GNG. And there is more in the history. duffbeerforme (talk) 14:26, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Failure to run WP:BEFORE. I have made some improvements to the page, and tidied it up a little. Here: [1] are the hits on the second of his books that Trump tweeted about. Frankly the guy sounds like a cross between a loose cannon and a clown with a very loose grip on facts. But he's notable. Not liking a political activist is not a reason to delete his page.E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:33, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Easily meets GNG. Sufficient IRS about subject already in article. SNOW I suggest. Not someone I share ideas with but they are notable, being covered in a wide variety of sources over a sustained period of time. Aoziwe (talk) 08:37, 10 May 2019 (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.