Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jake Mosser

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. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 01:11, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jake Mosser (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)

Fails WP:ENT, only a few one-shot bit roles. No RS. Pax 04:46, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  ^B E _C K ^Y _S A ^{Y L} E _S  07:08, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  ^B E _C K ^Y _S A ^{Y L} E _S  07:08, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.  ^B E _C K ^Y _S A ^{Y L} E _S  07:08, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions.  ^B E _C K ^Y _S A ^{Y L} E _S  07:09, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per poor deletion rationale, pushing at WP:GNG and nom's lack of WP:BEFORE. WP:ENT does not over-rule WP:GNG... it supplements it. And as sources ARE available for improvement,[1] claiming that none exist is disingenuous. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 12:42, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. This nomination is one of numerous this user had made. I see no proper deletion argument being put forth. The nominator has failed to do due diligence before this nomination. Chillum 04:55, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per above - There's lots of books and sources so BEFORE doesn't seem to have been followed ... (Unfortunately my laptops going extremely slow as I've busy saving a project so It's bloody impossible to add the sources at the moment, Sorry!). –Davey2010^Talk 22:33, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Source availability demonstrated. No appropriate deletion rationale.  ^B E _C K ^Y _S A ^{Y L} E _S  18:15, 19 January 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.