Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phil Torres (author)

:{{la|Phil Torres (author)}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Phil_Torres_(author) Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Phil Torres (author)}})

No evidence of notability given in references. References are mostly primary links to papers by the subject. Third-party links fail to substantiate notability. Some links look like third-party coverage but are first-party or mere indiscriminate directory site listings (e.g. the MTV link). No actual biographical details in references, which is the telling one. This guy could have an article, but a BLP needs actual substantial verifiable third-party content and this article just doesn't have it - David Gerard (talk) 10:26, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:24, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:25, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:25, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:25, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

• Delete fails WP:AUTHOR and also WP:MUSBIO. Although their is coverage of author, no third-party and not significant. EllsworthSchmittendorf (talk) 14:27, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
• Delete as the entire article is still questionable overall, none of this is imaginably better for the applicable notability. SwisterTwister talk 05:23, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.