Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steven Wells

:{{la|Steven Wells}} ([{{fullurl:Steven_Wells|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steven Wells}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

Notability unestablished, page almost entirely unsourced. "Recent death does not establish notability." Mikerichi (talk) 11:02, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

• Keep. He was an established journalist who wrote many articles for reliable publications such as the Guardian and New Musical Express. That fact alone makes him notable. I'm not going to scrabble around looking for references to those articles to illustrate this point; the onus is on you to demonstrate he was not notable. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 11:37, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
• Can't decide - the existence of articles about him does suggest notability. On the other hand, some of the claims appear specious - for example, he's not mentioned in the Mekons article. Deb (talk) 11:43, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
• Keep The article needs work with regard to sourcing and defining Wells' involvement in certain areas such as The Mekons, but he certainly seems notable enough to me. Bretonbanquet (talk) 12:17, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
• Keep Its a disgrace this article is even being considered for deletion. Theres nothing academic about the removal of common sense. At one time I might have empathised by suggesting linking to the pages on zines or actually putting an email through to the NME to find someone to verify this. I'm wondering if whom proposed this for deletion ever read the New Musical Express for any period of time. I read it for only a year and its validity is beyond apparent. [John Luke, 13:53, 25 June) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.2.116.208 (talk • contribs)
• Keep The Register seems to find him notable enough in [http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/06/25/swells_wikipedia/ their article]. Wakari07 (talk) 12:58, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
• Keep For the reasons mentioned above. "Recent death does not establish notability" misses the point. He is notable for being a well-respected journalist for a number of well-respected newspapers. --Sonofulster (talk) 13:23, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
• Keep The 'mark for deletion' is obviously trolling — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.167.20.120 (talk • contribs)
• Comment Please be aware that this has, and is receiving [http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/06/25/swells_wikipedia/ media attention], so would all editors please display the appropriate level of decorum and respect. \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 13:59, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

:*The register's report about this deletion debate also may contribute to the notability of the subject, keep. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 14:24, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

:The only editor around here who hasn't shown "the appropriate level of decorum and respect" is the one who nominated this article for deletion. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 14:08, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

::True, but a reminder doesn't hurt anyone. :) \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 14:09, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

• Keep - many articles, many obits. palfrey (talk) 14:03, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
• Strong Keep per Palfrey. Willking1979 (talk) 14:12, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
• Keep - Seething Wells was a major figure on the new music/comedy scene in the early Eighties, and Steven Wells was a widely known and respected journalist. The article may need fact-checking and citations, but what on earth has that got to do with deletion?

Hudspith (talk) 14:16, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

• Keep I take it you folks don't read NME, I've only been read it for a short period of time and I know of this person. [Dan Williams, 15:32, 25 June)
• Keep Not just a notable journalist, but a famous one: the serious media are already starting to crank out obits: see [http://news.google.co.uk/news?q=steven+wells], [http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/organgrinder/2009/jun/25/nme-writer-stephen-wells-tribute-james-brown]. On another note, I observe that the nominator's main activities since setting up their account seem to have been contributions to talk pages and AfD discussions, and that their very first interaction with Wikipedia was to start an AfD process. -- The Anome (talk) 14:31, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

: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.