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. Textbook example of no consensus. The article seems to have been updated since the start, although I can't say if that is for the better. Dennis - 2¢ 22:30, 26 October 2014 (UTC) reply

Patrick Howley

Patrick Howley (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

Non-notable journalist. The current version of the article contains only two non-primary references, but the one is just one sentence-namechecking: "As a New York city resident, I took particular interest in Patrick Howley’s story on Indian Point, which is the kind of story I’d like to see more of.)" and the other is a brief note in one of those blogs with more ads than words. The most in-depth discussion of the man and his work is found on the opposite of the spectrum, like this and this, which are all about some...eh...tweets that the subject made a while ago. These things aren't found in our article. Maybe this interview counts for something, but I do not see how the subject passes the GNG, and a bit of yelling back and forth on the blogs on either side don't really add up to significant, in-depth coverage in reliable sources. In my opinion. Drmies ( talk) 20:24, 3 October 2014 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 20:57, 3 October 2014 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 20:57, 3 October 2014 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Conservatism-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 02:54, 4 October 2014 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 02:54, 4 October 2014 (UTC) reply

• Keep, as shown in the nomination for deletion, the subject of this AfD has been the subject of non-primary significant coverage, including this event, and subject to such ridicule pieces as this and this. Although not flattering, they are significant coverage of the subject of the coverage. Therefore the subject appears to pass WP:GNG.-- RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 05:20, 8 October 2014 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Tom Morris ( talk) 18:52, 10 October 2014 (UTC) reply

• Delete. This is a generally non-notable journalist. As the previous comments have shown, there is some coverage of Patrick Howley. However, most of the coverage consists of opinion pieces, in effect saying "this guy stinks". I don't think of this as coverage by newspapers/magazines/whatever with a reputation for fact checking. Unless more factual articles can be found, the article should be deleted. -- Larry/Traveling_Man ( talk) 22:07, 10 October 2014 (UTC) reply

Two of teh sources I provided were to a news blog of the Washington Post, and to The Week, both of which are reliable sources. This should be sufficient to pass WP:GNG.-- RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 05:30, 11 October 2014 (UTC) reply

• Keep: sufficient notability established. Quis separabit? 00:27, 16 October 2014 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica ¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:53, 18 October 2014 (UTC) reply

• Keep - The subject passes WP:BASIC. Source examples include: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]. NorthAmerica ¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:03, 18 October 2014 (UTC) reply

• Delete - I am the subject, and this page was designed specifically by political critics who wanted to post defamatory hit pieces about me. This should not be the point of Wikipedia. The point of Wikipedia should not be cyber-harassment by specific individuals. Thank you -PH — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.44.5.213 ( talk) 20:50, 22 October 2014 (UTC) reply

I do not believe you are Patrick Howley. But if you are -- what exactly in the page is "defamatory"?? Quis separabit? 22:42, 22 October 2014 (UTC) reply

• Keep Per NorthAmerica Passes WP:BASIC. Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk) 07:27, 24 October 2014 (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.