Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Doug Bell (3rd 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 no consensus. Stifle (talk) 15:36, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Doug Bell

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

Delete. This individual WP:BLP lacks non-trivial coverage from reliable third party publications. If you actually drill down on some of the cites provided you will find passing mention or no mention of this person within. JBsupreme (talk) 17:47, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. (Search video game sources) MrKIA11 (talk) 00:19, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- Pcap ping 17:33, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Does not pass WP:AUTHOR in my view. Pcap ping 17:34, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 16:30, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - doesn't he pass #3 of WP:AUTHOR? i.e. lead programmer of the seminal Dungeon Master? Marasmusine (talk) 17:24, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep. Even apart from the obvious notability, substantial publication, surviving prior AfDs, etc., the bad-faith nomination was made solely as wikistalking because I had worked on the article. LotLE×talk 17:27, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep If he is the lead developed for the game, he is notable, and I think the references are good enough to show it. DGG ( talk ) 08:00, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Based on similar reasoning I would be notable, which I hadn't considered thus far. :)
The references currently in the article are rubbish (his amazon.com reviewers profile (!), an autobiography at jGuru.com, a masters thesis that doesn't mention him, and an interview in a niche magazine about development of one game) and none offer significant coverage of the topic, so he clearly fails WP:N. Most of the information has to be thrown out if this is kept.
There are five books and four notable video games where he played a significant role, so he is somewhat significant. I don't at all see "obvious" notability, like Lulu thinks, lots of people write books, lots of people have significant roles in video games. WP:AUTHOR#3 isn't enough, in my opinion: *every* video game released these days gets coverage (previews, tests) in multiple sources – that makes the product notable, but not the authors, and I can't believe it was intended that way.
Based on that, I would favor deletion, and seeing that there is no significant coverage of the topic at all and we'd be relying only on the indicators from WP:BIO, I quite firmly believe this should be deleted. Amalthea 16:43, 15 March 2010 (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.