Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jordan Stratford

general lack of notability, paucity or non-existence of legitimate resources Wikimonster007 (talk) 18:15, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete- per WP:N. There appears to be very little substantial coverage in independent sources. Reyk _YO! 21:57, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom.--CyberGhostface (talk) 22:56, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weird to be doing this to a page about oneself, but I've corrected some basic errors and the article now has references to numerous third parties. It's really the links themselves that may be of interest to researchers rather than the biographical data. But the book link, interviews, newspaper and magazine reviews and college course citations may be of use to those poking around the subject of Gnosticism.Jordanstratford (talk) 00:20, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete- per WP:N. If someone could find some better references, I'd be willing to look at this again. --Cameron Scott (talk) 01:46, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:N, WP:BIO, WP:RS, etc. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 14:40, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Stratford is a major proponent of the idea that Gnosticism comes out of pre-christian pagan antiquity. Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy are proponents of the idea that Christianity is a pagan offshoot, and other authors have referenced an influence of Pagan antiquity on Gnosticism, but only Stratford draws a direct line between Paganism and Gnosticism, a controversial stance.

• WP:N may certainly be an issue, but WP:RS is quite clearly satisfied. It's only the sources themselves, ultimately, that are of use. Jordanstratford (talk) 14:50, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]