Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/J. Devn Cornish (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. Michig (talk) 07:56, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

J. Devn Cornish (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Still doesn't have sources that are independent of the topic. Not an position that conveys auto-notability pbp 04:03, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Mr. Guye (talk) 04:07, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Utah-related deletion discussions. Mr. Guye (talk) 04:07, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Mr. Guye (talk) 04:07, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, No evidence of notability so thus fails GNG. –Davey2010^Talk 04:33, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Funny how most at DRV wanted to and I quote "re-nominate this straight away and reach the correct outcome this time".... Yet here we are a week later and not one !vote (exc mine) in sight ..... It's ridiculous!. –Davey2010^Talk 04:49, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Yeah, where'd User:Mkativerata and User:Hut 8.5 go? They sure seemed pretty adamant at DRV that this didn't meet GNG. pbp 05:16, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of El Salvador-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:15, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Guatemala-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:15, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete insufficient sourcing to meet WP:GNG. Snuggums (talk / edits) 05:28, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. As per DRV, a clearly unnotable subject, lacks independent secondary coverage. Cavarrone 05:35, 15 March 2015 (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.