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. MER-C 02:26, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Jarvis (author)

[edit]

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

I have reviewed the external links and references in this article and found them to be questionable: Reference 1 is a book review by a staff writer at Forbes. Reference 2 is a link to blog posts that Paul Jarvis has posted. Reference 3 implies that Adobe endorses or is somehow related to Paul Jarvis. Reference 3 also appears to be a blog NOT hosted by Adobe. Reference 4 is also a blog.

External link 1 takes you to a podcast interview (that I did not listen to) with Paul Jarvis. External link 2 is a blog hosted by someone interviewing Paul Jarvis. External link 3 takes you to a blog and a post about Paul Jarvis. External link 4 takes you to the website of Paul Jarvis where he states: “My newest articles are sent to my newsletter first, then tend to show up on Inc., Fast Company, The Huffington Post, Forbes,Lifehacker, The Next Web, Smashing Magazine, Adobe’s 99u and many more quality publications. There are already 10,000+ intelligent and attractive folks signed up.” I didn't find any articles in the publications he listed except for a self-published book review with Forbes. I question the notability of this living person and the lack of reputable sources.On his website he says that he has authored four best-selling books. These books are self-published and I have no way to determine whether or not they are best-sellers. I checked amazon… one book was ranked 45,344. This is not my definition of a best-seller. bpage (talk) 02:37, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 02:40, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:39, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Article creator has edited only two pages, both related to Jarvis. No notable references. LaMona (talk) 21:53, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~- I am the one who researched all the references and external links. bpage (talk) 00:42, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand: are you !voting"delete" on your own deletion nomination? You may comment all you want, but only one !vote per customer. Striking through. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:05, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am a relatively new, new-article reviewer and didn't realize that tagging the article was the same as 'voting' against it. You taught me something that I didn't know before. Thank you, friend. I spent about a half an hour researching this guy and I hope that he gets what he deserves - deletion. bpage (talk) 03:59, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:17, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: nothing to suggest that he passes either WP:GNG or WP:AUTHOR. (But a PROD might have saved time.) PamD 14:19, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note that ref 3 is from the 99U blog from Behance: "s a network of sites and services specializing in self-promotion", to quote the WP article. He seems to be a self-published author and non-notable blogger. Enough said. PamD 14:36, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete A non-notable blogger and author. Per WP:AUTHOR. NickGibson3900 - Talk - Sign my Guestbook 23:47, 15 August 2014 (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.