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. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 01:33, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

John P. McEneny

[edit]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: ((subst:spa|username)); suspected canvassed users: ((subst:canvassed|username)); accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: ((subst:csm|username)) or ((subst:csp|username)).

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

I don't think this person meets the notability guidelines. The coverage below (which substantiates that the person exists, but does not establish notability) doesn't do it, and there's nothing else out there. Sven Manguard Wha? 23:46, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:26, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:26, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I did a search and I couldn't find anything that would show that he passes WP:AUTHOR or WP:ACADEMIC. While he has written a few plays and seems to be a popular teacher to his students, that in itself isn't enough to establish notability per Wikipedia guidelines. I have a feeling that this might end up attracting some of his students, so I want to add the "not a vote" label to this in case they do show up.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 04:51, 21 December 2011 (UTC)tokyogirl79[reply]
Delete. I'm forced to agree with Tokyogirl; there's no indication that the subject passes either of those notability guidelines. Usual Caveats apply, however; it's possible that one of the subject's plays (or their academic work) might gain some notice in the future. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 15:15, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete' - No significant coverage to establish notability. -- Whpq (talk) 18:03, 22 December 2011 (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.