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. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:35, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Wesley Weeks, III[edit]

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

Notability not established. Outside of press coverage over a domestic dispute, no indication of significant contribution to his field. Wkharrisjr (talk) 00:26, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:43, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:43, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:44, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:BLP1E. St Anselm (talk) 02:00, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Putting the alleged assault incident into its proper context is an editing matter. This is a famous individual, a prominent televangelist, not a BLP-1E situation. See, for example THIS STORY in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution on the Bishop's marriage. Passes GNG. Carrite (talk) 04:53, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- I see nothing notable in the article, except that his first wife manages to be WP-notable and that he was engaged in a brawl 5 years ago. Or was he notable as a tele-evangelist? If so, the article needs to be expanded to cover this. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:38, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - "Notable" is not a value assessment about the worth or lack or worth about a subject, it is an indication that a subject has been covered multiple times in independently published sources of presumable accuracy. In short: can the subject be sourced out independently of their own published or unpublished words? Carrite (talk) 02:49, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Classic WP:BLP1E. -- 101.119.15.224 (talk) 13:04, 15 October 2013 (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.