- 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. ✗ plicit 23:44, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Tim Knight
AfDs for this article:
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Tim Knight ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Doesn't appear to be notable. No significant coverage that I could spot. PepperBeast (talk) 23:22, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Journalism, and Canada. PepperBeast (talk) 23:22, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. No significant coverage supporting notability exists. While the subject has received some journalism awards, they seem standard for members of the press. His coverage appears local. Fails notability guidelines for WP:GNG. Does not pass WP:BASIC. - AuthorAuthor ( talk) 19:59, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. This is referenced entirely to primary sources, such as his own website, pieces of his own bylined writing about other things, and a radio segment where he was one of the speakers — and even the one citation that appears to be third-party coverage, because it's credited in the footnote to "Ray Regan", actually turned out to also be written by Tim Knight when I actually Waybacked it. As always, the notability of a journalist is not established by sources in which he's the creator of content about other things, it's established by sources in which he's the subject of content created by other people — but there's absolutely none of that here, and nothing stated in the article is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to be referenced considerably better than this. Bearcat ( talk) 14:44, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
- 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.