Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alan Watson (magician)

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The result was keep (nomination withdrawn). Non-admin closure by 12 Noon ^2¢ 21:00, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Alan Watson (magician)

Alan Watson (magician) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Claims to be internationally renowned, but absolutely no proof of notability. Was tagged for speedy as so assertion of notability, but I declined, as being internationally renowned sounds like a claim of notability. Nyttend (talk) 02:02, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

• Comment I found this [1] If the claims are true I think there's a definate arguement that he's notable, but I think it would have to be sourced from a different reference. This looks like a place to hire speakers and probably wouldn't hold up to WP:RS.--Cube lurker (talk) 02:18, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
• Delete he might have some marginal notability amongst his peers, but no sign of any substantial notability in the wider world. RMHED (talk) 02:23, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
• Keep Thanks to the rewrite it's now clear he has enough notability in his field to warrant an article RMHED (talk) 20:04, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
• Keep
  • http://www.magicians.org.au/files/Vol5609.pdf
  • http://www.magicunlimited.com/lecture_reviews.htm
  • http://www.magicsam.com/press/index2.asp
  • http://www.magicmasterclass.com/
  • http://www.magicwebchannel.com/advisorspanel.htm
  • http://www.hocus-pocus.com/magicshop/inc/product_detail.cfm?item=8329

VIQleSthe2nd (talk) 02:33, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

• Comment I took out the fluff. Take another look at it. GeorgeLouis (talk) 03:53, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
• Keep. Definite notability in the magic world. I don't agree with RMHED's argument that notability needs to be worldwide to be valid. There's probably plenty of notable physicists or archaeologists that are very notable but don't make it into mainstream media. Tanthalas39 (talk) 04:32, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Comment true enough but as he's in the entertainment industry you could reasonably expect to find some mainstream media coverage. It's clear he has far more than marginal notability in his field, I have changed my opinion accordingly. RMHED (talk) 20:04, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

• Keep, seems to have strong notability within the magic community supported by the additional references cited above - Dumelow (talk) 17:49, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
• Snowball keep, rather obvious where this is going :-) Withdrawing nomination. Nyttend (talk) 18:05, 3 January 2008 (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.