Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Basedow

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. Nakon 01:53, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

John Basedow

John Basedow (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This person fails

• Delete I refrained from taking this to AfD in case the subject is notable (in the US) but the promo article and lack of sourcing were hiding it. As a BLP unless sources are produced quickly agree this fails GNG / V / BLP. Further this page is a promo / COI / vandalism car-crash that's attracted much vandalism, overprotection and
  WP:OWN from the COI SPA driving it. Widefox; talk 09:34, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Reply: The SPA involved in this has been blocked. If there is substantial US coverage, can someone in the US find it. From my perspective (in the UK), there isn't any real coverage. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:55, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment There's an (old) copyright issue [1] that may or may not still be relevant. Widefox; talk 09:44, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I've checked
  WP:BIO is a long way from being met. SmartSE (talk) 11:43, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:31, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:31, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:31, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:31, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:31, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• delete I thought sourcing this would be a snap, after all 80,000+ twitter followers. I found only [2], [3], plus a million mentions where things are sourced to him as a very active online promulgator of info. Not enough coverage of him to source an article.E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:04, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Non-notable (per
  WP:GNG), former television pitchman in the U.S. Miniapolis 22:16, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete per GNG. There must be tens of thousands of persons of similar background in the US alone, and, but for a few exceptions, almost all equally unnotable. This is not one of the exceptions. HandsomeFella (talk) 21:31, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per
  re-do the thing I'd say we can let them with no onus against a properly formatted and sourced recreationSchmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 06:44, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete as non notable. Dbrodbeck (talk) 13:01, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]