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 no consensus. SoWhy 07:29, 12 July 2017 (UTC)reply
Although entertaining and quite interesting in its own way, it's hard to see how this meets the notability threshold. Although there are some media appearances and comments, many of them seem incidental. A fair portion of citations also appear to be self-published.
Shritwod (
talk) 14:17, 20 June 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep – I've previously edited this article in minor ways. I would argue that it passes the threshold for notability, though perhaps not greatly exceeding that threshold.
— jmcgnh(talk)(contribs) 16:38, 22 June 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete as per nom. The lack of
WP:RS beyond incidental mentions fails the
WP:GNG -
GretLomborg (
talk) 04:46, 27 June 2017 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 11:47, 27 June 2017 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 03:23, 4 July 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.