Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ross Quinn

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 delete. Singularity 04:08, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ross Quinn

Ross Quinn (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Questionable notability. Already speedied once and has been recreated. Marwood 15:57, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

• Delete I've found one additional source[1] besides the one in the article, but although it is an interesting tale, I don't think it meets the threshold. The spammy, PR-ish tone doesn't help make a good impression, either. --Groggy Dice T | C 10:26, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
• Comment The creator of the page keeps removing the AfD notice - and has blanked this page. The changes were reverted and the editor has been asked to stop. Marwood 10:50, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

• Keep Article Ross Quinn is quite famous and the story should remain on wikepedia as people want to know about this youngman. I request that this article remains intact, deleting this article is non-productive. However, telling me how to modify this is, or offer advice. Waiting for your reply. I must say, anybody in their right mind after reading the4 article which is backed up by hard evidence that this guy should be on wikipedia. Stop clowning around and leave it alone! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Typeone9 (talk • contribs)

Please define how Ross qualifies under WP:NOTE. Marwood 11:31, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

• Keep ArticleMarwood - YOU, please explain exactly what, IN YOUR THOUGHTS does not meet the guidelines, as from my judgement everything is fine. You are requesting to delete my hard work in making this article, i respect Ross Quinn alot, he's my hero, i think he should be given more significance and recognition, so i believe you should be the one being specific and outlining the "apparant" boundaries crossed.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.42.109.45 (talk • contribs) 11:38, 9 August 2007 (UTC), apparently the same as User:Typeone9.

You can't vote keep, twice! The notability requirements for inclusion in Wikipedia state that the subject must have received significant coverage from a variety of reliable sources independent of the subject. Ross Quinn doesn't meet this standard; as the only sources given are a couple of local newspaper interviews with Quinn himself. Marwood 11:48, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

• Further CommentRoss Quinn made national news - ITV do you think that is local? Please call them, they will confirm. Ross has without a doubt received significant publicity through his ventures. He was seen again on the BBC news in a meeting with Richard Branson to speak about being the youngest astronaut in the world! Please tell me how this is not significant.

I don't think this is significant coverage; I've been on television and in the newspapers more often than this. But if you think you have sufficient reliable sources to back up your claim that Quinn is notable, then please review WP:CITE and then add them to the page as appropriate. Many thanks. Marwood 12:01, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

• Further CommentYou might have been on the news more times Marwood, but i severely doubt you've been on for something extraordinary like this young man, many thanks.
• Delete, PR piece, with only two PR interviews as sources, apparently no way to write a fully verifiable and neutral article from what we have. Surprisingly few Google hits for such an "amazing story". Kusma (talk) 12:20, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - per notability, --Tom 12:57, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete unsourced and probably non-notable. Melsaran 16:20, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Unsourced vanity article. Cap'n Walker 21:43, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Per the four posters above me. Interesting, but definitely doesn't belong in an encyclopedia. GlassCobra 03:13, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete No independent sourcing attests to notability.--Mantanmoreland 16:03, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, one puff piece in the business section of the local paper is not enough to meet WP:BIO. Nuttah68 10:39, 12 August 2007 (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.