Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nate Howard (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. Consensus is clear enough DGG ( talk ) 04:16, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nate Howard

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

Delete. Comprehensively fails General Notability Guideline. Not only that, most of the content on the page was added by Natehoward91, which based on his age from the sources seem to be Nate himself or that they are either are his friends, peers, or his publicist. The entirety of Natehoward91 contributions are on this page. Hence my nomination for deletion. Shamenotnow (talk) 02:28, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shamenotnow (talk • contribs) 09:14, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:32, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:32, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

the nominator left a neutrally worded message on my user talk page asking for my input. I would say that Google News does show some reliable sources about the article subject. Coverage is mostly in the San Diego area (but I don't see any policy-based requirement for nonlocal coverage for biographical articles) but not significant enough, at least not yet, to meet WP:BASIC. Delete. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:52, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:53, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:53, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete non-notable poet.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:50, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Removed debate from the United States discussions list, as it now appears in the California list. NewYorkActuary (talk) 14:28, 29 July 2016 (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.