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 to delete. Eluchil404 (talk) 04:05, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Peach

[edit]

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

This article was semi-protected over a dispute, prodded, then redirected. Bringing here for a community assessment as to WP:NOTE. Cirt (talk) 15:37, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The author was an SPA who obviously had an extensive knowledge of Mr. Peach beyond what appeared in the cited source. Racepacket (talk) 15:51, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and Redirect to BBC Radio 2. Not notable by himself, but as he reads the news on Radio 2 people will no doubt search for him. If redirected the page should continue to be semi-protected to prevent its recreation and another pointless edit war between the two parties involved - both of who were BBC employees. TheRetroGuy (talk) 17:29, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - There are virtually no sources on this individual (and I spent a lot of time searching for them when I tried to verify the information in the article). The only sources appear to be Peach's BBC page [1] and a 2007 article from the Times in which he is mentioned. [2] Not a great basis on which to build a stable article. TheRetroGuy (talk) 17:40, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. Criterion 4(c) for creative professionals discusses critical recognition. He won an award at the New York Radio Festival - which, even though he won in a category specifically for England, it was still an international festival - and was nominated for Sony Radio Academy Awards. If we can source that he's won a Sony award, that will make it a more solid keep, since he'll have won awards from two organizations. Also, to RetroGuy: somebody added some new sources today, including the programme from the NYRF (primary but authoritative for award recipients). —C.Fred (talk) 16:55, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Perhaps I didn't persevere for long enough, although to be fair I seem to recall I spent about an hour on it. I Googled, Google News'd, Yahoo'd and Lycos'd him. It didn't produce a lot, so I'm glad there are others with more determination. :) TheRetroGuy (talk) 12:40, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A quick google search has unearthed links which support the facts in the article and I have added them to it. Cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.185.144.121 (talk) 11:35, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 22:29, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep The recently added info on the awards seems sufficient--though usually I am rather skeptical about articles on radio announcers, DGG ( talk ) 22:02, 26 September 2009 (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.