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. J04n(talk page) 13:51, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Derek Jory (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)

WP:BLP, based on a single primary source with no evidence of reliable source coverage shown, of a journalist notable primarily for running a hockey team's social media presence. This is not a claim of notability that gets somebody into an encyclopedia in and of itself, if they aren't the subject of enough media coverage about them in that role to pass WP:GNG. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 03:39, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:16, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:16, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of British Columbia-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:16, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete comes no where near meeting the notability requirements for a journalist.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:38, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Good catch. Created in February 2012 by a single-purpose account with an obvious conflict of interest ("Derek Jory is a very popular blogger and is well known in Vancouver"). This is no Albert Londres. —Prhartcom♥ 05:24, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as there's by far nothing at all for any applicable notability including minimal notability, nothing at all convincing and thus nothing to salvage or otherwise improve. Delete by all means. SwisterTwister talk 06:42, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Looks like a clear-cut case. He's just not particularly notable. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 13:45, 13 June 2016 (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.