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 keep. Seeing as the claim of GNG being met has gone uncontested. Will tag as cleanup needed though as the need for cleanup has been stated and not contested either. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:58, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nate Fish (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Still no difference than 6 no the ago, absolutely nothing for actual notability at all. SwisterTwister talk 20:12, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - does not meet criterial for notability. Seems promotional or self-promotional. Netherzone (talk) 20:44, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk) 07:54, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk) 07:54, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk) 07:54, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Near as I can tell, he calls himself that on his blog. Spanneraol (talk) 06:17, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like your reason to delete is the article needs to be cleaned up. Perhaps instead WP:SOFIXIT would be more appropriate than deleting the page. - GalatzTalk 20:08, 1 January 2017 (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.