Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Riley Blake

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. ✗plicit 10:22, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Riley Blake

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

None of the sources in the article seem to cover the subject in any depth and ~~most~~ much of the article is unsourced, in obvious violation of WP:BLP. From the article it emerges that he is an entirely ordinary staff writer/reporter with no special claim to notability. A Google search turns up a twitter account with a small amount of followers and not too much else. After the article has been deprodded, I now think it should be deleted for not meeting WP:GNG or WP:BIO. Modussiccandi (talk) 09:32, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Modussiccandi (talk) 09:32, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Modussiccandi (talk) 09:32, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Modussiccandi (talk) 09:32, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I wouldn't say most of the article is unsourced, just half of it, and this man is a writer for notable publications, including the Portland Mercury. However, that's not enough to establish notability. Coverage from independent sources establishes notability, and none of the article's cited sources do that, a majority of them just pages of sites he works for listing articles written by the author. GNews wasn't of any help. I put quotes in "Riley Blake", yet Google still felt the need to bring up results that only said "Riley's Blake Wesley", with no results about the journalist or even work by him. Overall, pretty good case for deletion. 👨x🐱 (talk) 17:48, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No in-depth coverage. Fails WP:GNG — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mehmood.Husain (talk • contribs) 00:08, 11 July 2021 (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.