Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Barnett (video game designer): Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 15:10, 13 October 2011

Paul Barnett (video game designer)

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

Multiple issues: Limited notability WP:GNG WP:NTEMP, Poorly sourced references WP:SOURCES WP:QS WP:DEADREF, CV like WP:COI, Poorly written, Random Trivia, lacks independence/autobiographical WP:COI. See Talk page for more details TheEvery (talk) 23:06, 10 October 2011 (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) 01:17, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:18, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - rescue - A lot of the issues you mention are about the writing style and, therefore, can be fixed. The main issue for me here is notability - is Paul Barnett notable enough to have a Wikipedia page. A great deal of the sources used are problematic - they're either unreliable or are reliable but do not provide sufficient notability. It does seem that this and this, however, are reliable enough and provide notability. I think that this article needs rescue (and I will tag as such), but not deletion. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 15:59, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete! I'm not sure, he's best known for Warhammer Online, however in less than a decade that will be forgotten along with Paul. Not "encyclopaedic" enough. See Wikipedia:Notability#Notability_is_not_temporary TheEvery 194.74.155.52 (talk) 12:10, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Notability is not temporary doesn't mean the subject has to have ongoing coverage. It means that if he's notable now, he will continue to be notable. Even if he's forgotten and never given additional coverage again in the future. So the question is "Is he notable now?" Reach Out to the Truth 14:52, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. Interesting - how do you test for that? I know games designers/producers/directors, with far more impressive careers than Paul that are not in Wikipedia. Should they be, probably not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.74.155.52 (talk) 15:08, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to apply: "In particular, if reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event, and if that person otherwise remains, or is likely to remain, a low-profile individual, we should generally avoid having a biographical article on that individual." Is his career notable, or just the part where he worked at Mythic?

@@ Line 12: / Line 12: @@
 *:"Notability is not temporary doesn't mean the subject has to have ongoing coverage. It means that '''if''' he's notable now, he will continue to be notable. Even if he's forgotten and never given additional coverage again in the future. So the question is "Is he notable ''now''?" [[User talk:Reach Out to the Truth|Reach Out to the Truth]] 14:52, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
 *:: Hmm. Interesting - how do you test for that? I know games designers/producers/directors, with far more impressive careers than Paul that are not in Wikipedia. Should they be, probably not.  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/194.74.155.52|194.74.155.52]] ([[User talk:194.74.155.52|talk]]) 15:08, 13 October 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
+*::This seems to apply: "In particular, if reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event, and if that person otherwise remains, or is likely to remain, a low-profile individual, we should generally avoid having a biographical article on that individual." Is his career notable, or just the part where he worked at Mythic?