Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William P. Simmons

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. Sandstein 17:13, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

William P. Simmons

WP:NN author. Failing to win lots of awards doesn't pass Wikipedia:BIO#Creative_professionals. Failed {{prod}} after sole editor objected. Toddst1 (talk) 19:58, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for failing to assert notability. The article includes precisely zero sources and a Google search doesn't help much either. one brave monkey 20:10, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:03, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:00, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
weak delete I see several references to him, but not as a primary topic. The info in the article seems true, but he appears to be just short of notable. PHARMBOY (TALK) 00:18, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The guidelines state that if "The person has received a notable award or honor, or has been often nominated for them" then they are notable enough to be included. As a longtime reader of Wikipedia, I see it as having two key advantages over other sources: it's fresh and current, and it's more extensive. If I'm looking for information on Edgar Allen Poe, I'm probably not going to bother with Wikipedia. If I'm looking for information on Stephen King, I'll probably check both Wikipedia and other sources. If I'm looking form information on someone like William P. Simmons or Paul Melniczek I'm not going to bother going anywhere else but Wikipedia. We're not talking about an unknown author here, this guy is repeatedly published and there are people who are probably looking for information on him (that's actually how I got involved to begin with. I saw a book by Melniczek on Amazon and wanted to know more about the author.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by User:Halloweiner (talk 19:20, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
— Halloweiner (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
- reply The policy also clearly states that all articles *must* be verifiable. I wasn't able to find any references, any news or articles about him. If you have one or two, then that would likely change everything. If not, then anything in the article is just a "claim" that is not backed up by any proof, as verified by reliable sources PHARMBOY ( moo ) 00:38, 26 October 2008 (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.