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. – GorillaWarfare (talk) 00:12, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nathan Torkington

[edit]

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

No independent secondary sources to establish notability as required by WP:GNG and WP:BIO. The only secondary source offered only quotes him making a very general comment about Microsoft in an article about Microsoft's participation in open source. Msnicki (talk) 19:10, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. -gadfium 20:51, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. -gadfium 20:53, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Insufficiently notable. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 21:29, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Having authored one Perl book and having given talks at OSCON is not really above the average technical writer. No independent sources cover him specifically. FuFoFuEd (talk) 22:35, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 00:12, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I've added a few references to him in his role as a commentator. Stuartyeates (talk) 06:45, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So far as I can see, not one of the citations you've offered supports notability. Notability requires reliable independent secondary sources that address the subject in depth. What you've added are a bunch of primary sources, unreliable blog entries and other junk. All it takes to establish notability is two decent articles; I still don't think they're there. Msnicki (talk) 12:27, 20 June 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.