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.
Non-notable contactee. Seems to fail
WP:BIO. Sole reliable source about him mentions him only in passing. I do not believe that every person
Long John Nebel interviewed deserves an encyclopedia article all to themselves.
ScienceApologist (
talk) 04:04, 2 January 2009 (UTC)reply
Delete. No significant coverage in reliable sources. Alternatively, merge to the article about the martian he met. --brewcrewer(yada, yada) 05:36, 2 January 2009 (UTC)reply
Delete. Agree with nom, unless non-trivial coverage about the individual (not the event) can be found in multiple, third-party
reliable sources. Cheers,
CP 16:56, 2 January 2009 (UTC)reply
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.
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.
Non-notable contactee. Seems to fail
WP:BIO. Sole reliable source about him mentions him only in passing. I do not believe that every person
Long John Nebel interviewed deserves an encyclopedia article all to themselves.
ScienceApologist (
talk) 04:04, 2 January 2009 (UTC)reply
Delete. No significant coverage in reliable sources. Alternatively, merge to the article about the martian he met. --brewcrewer(yada, yada) 05:36, 2 January 2009 (UTC)reply
Delete. Agree with nom, unless non-trivial coverage about the individual (not the event) can be found in multiple, third-party
reliable sources. Cheers,
CP 16:56, 2 January 2009 (UTC)reply
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.