Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonathon Sharkey (2nd nomination)

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 --JForget 01:30, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Jonathon Sharkey

Jonathon Sharkey (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

There was one prior "keep" result early last year, but since then there is no indication that this person developed any real notability; if anything, the 15 minutes of fame appeared to be up. Delete. --Nlu (talk) 06:18, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

• Keep 15 minutes of fame is enough. Catchpole (talk) 09:05, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
• Delete There is an utter lack of reliable primary and secondary sourcing. Newspapers, books, essays? anything? Non-notable individual. (Mind meal (talk) 10:28, 5 February 2008 (UTC))
• Strong keep On the contrary, FEC reccords and court records must be reliable sources, and we also have local news coverage. Notablity is fulfilled: [WP:NOTABILITY|"significant coverage in reliable sources indepedent of the subject"]. The subject has been covered by major newspapers and TV networks over a long period with multiple aspects being examined. While the subject of the article is fringy, that doesn't trump any piece of notabilty. --Stlemur (talk) 11:55, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
• Keep Notability is not temporary. 15 minutes is enough. Fosnez (talk) 12:18, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
• Keep - once again, notability is not temporary. Your argument for deletion is counter to policy. matt91486 (talk) 21:53, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
  • But for the fact that Mary Carey had independent notability, I doubt that her article would be still standing. Sharkey doesn't have independent notability besides his "campaign," which is not itself a substantial campaign, nor is it getting any more publicity by this point. WP:N's quote, "A short burst of news reports about a topic does not necessarily constitute evidence of long-term notability[,]" is directly applicable in this case, I think. I doubt that he received more coverage than Azia Kim, for example. --Nlu (talk) 11:51, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
• Keep Appeared in WeirdNJ, is recognized political figure. AnnDenn (talk) 07:05, 7 February 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.76.152.6 (talk)
• Keep as per everyone above. Editorofthewiki (talk) 23:30, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
• Keep per Fosnez. Raymond Giggs 11:07, 11 February 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.