Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John F. Ashton

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. Of the 36 participants in this discussion, 23 !voted for deletion, which is a reasonable 64%, and a number of those reconfirmed their vote after reading through the ongoing discussion, while one of those !voting to keep, offered little rationale – “I think the page should be kept” The arguments for and against deletion focused on the quantity and quality of the coverage in sources. John J. Bulten (JJB) offered an impressive list of sources; however, as pointed out, these did not deal with the topic with the significant detail required in the GNG. Claims that the topic meant with criteria in WP:Prof are rigorously challenged, and the strongest claim, that he is an “elected member of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society”, is disputed, though not completely dismissed. The strongest argument for keeping, as put forward by DGG, is that under WP:AUTHOR he has some notability as he has created a well known work that has been the subject of multiple reviews. However this is disputed as the main work reviewed was assembled rather than created by the topic. This AfD discussion was initially closed as No consensus then undone as the original closer felt unable to put forward a closing rationale, and discussion continued on the article talkpage, which has been consulted. Overall there is significant enough consensus that notability has not been established for this topic, and deletion is the appropriate option. However, I will userfy the material on request to allow work to continue until notability can be established. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 22:53, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]