Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Barnett (video game designer)(2nd nomination)

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 keep. Ordinarily I wouldn't close as "keep" with just one !vote, but it's pretty obvious that this was a bad faith nomination. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 15:29, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Barnett (video game designer)

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

Lack of notability — Preceding unsigned comment added by KongDonkeyEvade (talk • contribs) 10:31, 9 October 2013‎ (UTC)[reply]

~~Speedy~~ keep - notability seems to have been well and truly established during the last AFD where there was only one particularly determined SPA pushing for deletion. WP:NOTTEMP covers the rest. Stalwart111 12:33, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

While he probably is notable, if someone can go through the sources and find the relevant ones, none of that is reason for a Wikipedia:Speedy keep. The last AfD saw legitimate questions about many marginal sources. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:26, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was looking at SK.2(c) but it's obviously not "immediately" enough so, yeah, how about just regular old keep. One agressive SPA supported deletion (the nominator) and the nomination was based on alleged (but unsubstantiated) COI and WP:OSE. When pushed on the sources he claimed interviews didn't count - a claim roundly rejected by other contributors. Stalwart111 11:06, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 16:31, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:31, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:32, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:32, 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.