Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gary Null

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 no consensus. W.marsh 18:56, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gary Null

Non-notable. — Wackymacs 17:51, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

• Why did you nominate it? It was already tagged with prod. Punkmorten 19:03, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Weak Keep. It was proper to bring this to AfD, although a much better explanation for why it ought to be deleted is necessary, as the article itself asserts notability. However, the real notability might not be what is asserted in the article, but more to do with the controversy surrounding this person. That is not to say the article does not have serious problems. Most of the templates (i.e. POV, verification, etc.) on it are merited. Most of it is unverified - I don't think I can believe much is what is being said in the article. In fact, there's no reason why much of the unsourced or improper material has to remain during this discussion. Agent 86 20:06, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Sigh. Why nominate an article tagged with {{prod}} for AFD? This article asserts notability (that's why it's not a CSD candidate), but its subject is not actually notable in any verifiable way. NatusRoma | Talk 00:47, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete no verified evidence of notability.--Peta 02:54, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Strong Keep What??? This man is a HUGE HUGE name in his field. His line of vitamins are sold in the Vitamin Shoppe, he's written several books. He is thoroughly, thoroughly notable. What are you people thinking???? And no, I am not in any way affiliated with Gary Null. Igbogirl 04:28, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep, he's a self-promoting "guru" but he's notable. 78 results from nytimes.com alone. --Dhartung | Talk 12:30, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Dhartung. Presumably some of the NY Times references will be usable. Itsmejudith 14:51, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, article does need more sourced information. However Mr. Null success and popularity as an author and radio show host is notable and the controversy surrounding some of his views and therapies is not by itself cause for deletion. Article should focus on radio show as starting point for providing sourced material without needlessly biasing the article towards Mr. Null's POV. That is, more sourced facts are needed to provide a context for the opposing POV's surrounding GN.

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.