Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jason Bentley
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. John254 00:14, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Jason Bentley (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
fails to assert why this person is notable, lacks sufficient 3rd party references Rtphokie (talk) 16:23, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Has an implicit claim to notability as host of radio shows. All three external links are 3rd party sources to some extent (including IMDB); a radio station's website is not a personal website.--ragesoss (talk) 16:34, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Since the article is about a radio show host, I feel it is slightly notable, and for its size it has an adequate number of 3rd party references. There are plenty other small larticles like this. Yamakiri TC § 07-25-2008 • 17:11:18 17:11, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment While this is true of licensed radio stations, I'm not aware of any implicit notability for radio personalities. WP:BIO applies and insists on significant coverage in verifiable 3rd party sources. This article contains only references to primary sources. The common name is making searches for news articles a bit challenging, Can someone more familiar with him can find some appropriate references to add to this article.--Rtphokie (talk) 17:21, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I've added a couple of more third-party sources to the references section. -- Bovineone (talk) 17:47, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Sufficiently referenced as it exists now. Jclemens (talk) 19:53, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Plenty of inside links and outside references. Proves notability. Needs a little cleanup here and there, but most of all, more content. With all the references shown, the main author should have plenty of material at hand to expand this article and include a better background biography and, if referenced and available, a "personal life" section or some such. I am a firm believer in always giving every chance to prove a "person article" - because when it comes right down to it, the line separating notable-enough individuals from not-notable-enough (as we all are notable, I hope, in a way) is far too broad and hard to define. It's got all the basics of a good article, and, if tweaked and expanded a bit, will only get better. itinerant_tuna (talk) 03:54, 26 July 2008 (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.