Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clive Rich

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:02, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Clive Rich

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

apparently promotional article on non notable attorney and author; one non-notable book. DGG ( talk ) 03:01, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:17, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:18, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:18, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:18, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- actually a barrister, not an attorney. It is not clear whether he is practising as a barrister or has become a backroom worker in the media industry. However this is a clear case of notability not being inherited - in this case from his clients. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:26, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:GNG or WP:CREATIVE #3 (multiple reviews), sources include:

Director magazine[1]
StartupTV Magazine [2]
Huffington Post [3]
Business Matters [4]
BBC [5]
CMI Management Book of the Year [6] (in association with the British Library)
The Times [7]
The Jewish Chronicle [8]
The Guardian [9]
City A.M. [10]

That's 9 or 10 independent reliable sources that cover the subject and/or his works. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 03:18, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 00:35, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Meets WP:BASIC upon a source review, including some of those listed above by User:Green Cardamom. Northamerica1000^(talk) 11:59, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 02:37, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Maybe his one book could be notable for an article? But if it was just that he would only be known for a single event. The Jewish Chronicle piece on him confers nothing to notability in my opinion, because it is essentially a promotional piece. --Atethnekos (Discussion, Contributions) 08:15, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Promotional article about non-notable lawyer who wrote a non-notable book. Coretheapple (talk) 16:10, 9 October 2013 (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.