Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scott Gurvey (2nd 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 delete. czar 19:19, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Scott Gurvey

[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)

failure to meet WP:BIO, the previous nom was speedily closed as it was appeared to be only focused on lack of references, while this is about notability. Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ _Talk 17:47, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ _Talk 17:47, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ _Talk 17:47, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete – The Globe and Mail article seems to me to be a full-fledged notability reference, but in doing a BEFORE search I do not find anything else to go with it. There are lots of Gurvey hits, since he is a long-established journalist, so it feels like he should be notable, but I'm not seeing anything else with the required sort of coverage. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:07, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The article in Globe and Mail is significant coverage of the subject, but that appears to be the only such source that I can find on him. Otherwise, there are only tangential hits that briefly mention him without any real significant coverage. — MarkH21 (talk) 07:50, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete: It is just not enough at the moment, needs more WP:RS. Meeanaya (talk) 07:03, 10 September 2019 (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.