Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Will Tuttle

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. MBisanz ^talk 20:34, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Will Tuttle (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)

Can't find reliable sources covering Will Tuttle, just minor unreliable outlets like VegNews, Animal Rights Zone, and a couple local papers. Empamazing (talk) 05:31, 19 April 2016 (UTC) (strike comment by now-blocked sock per this SPI Jytdog (talk) 10:38, 23 April 2016 (UTC))[reply]

I agree. Doesn't seem notable. Looks like the CV of the subject. Alkibiades14 (talk) 02:33, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete No reliable sources to support WP:BIO notability. Wikipedia is not LinkedIn. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 22:01, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep His World Peace Diet book was a bestseller on Amazon. Also found mentions in Huffington Post and Democracy Now. Funcrunch (talk) 18:23, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Also IOL. VegNews is the largest vegetarian lifestyle magazine, it appears to have editorial standards and qualify as an RS. That makes at least four weak sources, which to me makes this a borderline keep. --Sammy1339 (talk) 16:37, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:48, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:48, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:48, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:48, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:48, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Move to Draft instead for now as I found nothing convincingly better and this would still need better improvements. SwisterTwister talk 22:40, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• delete per TNT. so promotional that would have to be completely rewritten and notability would be uncertain even then. Jytdog (talk) 00:42, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Just PR material. Xxanthippe (talk) 04:08, 28 April 2016 (UTC).[reply]
• Delete - Searches did not turn up enough in-depth coverage to meet WP:GNG. In addition, I agree with Jytdog that even if it did pass notability criteria, the article is so promotional that WP:TNT would apply. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:25, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as purely promotional. RickinBaltimore (talk) 13:27, 28 April 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.