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. NW (Talk) 03:03, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Blakeley

[edit]

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

Sorry, but this subject is utterly non-notable. The page has a GNG tag on it since last June and the subject, a minor blogger and video editor, made the presses once for a stunt he was involved in at CES last year. Now, the article has been a target for unfounded speculation about legal matters surrounding his girlfriend.(1) To summarize; it's another BLP1E case, where its subject is not notable outside a single (somewhat non-notable in itself) event. It's also becoming a magnet for unfounded allegations and various attacks. Alison ^❤ 01:40, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete One stunt in a trade show should not warrant an article. --Jmundo (talk) 04:49, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non-notable, BLP1E. Ein Spiel (talk) 06:39, 3 November 2009 (UTC) (Note: account blocked as a sock of a banned editor - Alison ^❤ 06:41, 6 November 2009 (UTC))[reply]
Delete as per BLP1E. 147.200.199.37 (talk) 07:03, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per nom, WP:BLP1E. Coffee // have a cup // ark // 17:48, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete BLP1E indeed. Vyvyan Basterd (talk) 04:02, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
keep I'm not sure that this is a BLP1E. Blakeley has been involved in other notable events. For example, he has been discussed in the Wall Street Journal for his food blog [1] which has also led to a book which has been reviewed in a number of locations [2]. While the article as written only talks about the CES matter, there are other sources about his other activities. There are a lot of sources about his blog and the associated book. JoshuaZ (talk) 00:17, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He co-wrote a book that was reviewed by some bloggers. So? I'm sure that I can dig up some author of a book which has been reviewed on a blog, maybe even a notable blog. One is not notable because of being mentioned in the WSJ, either. This article is not a biography, either -- it's a piece about someone known for one event, and that's the only thing it mentions. Ein Spiel (talk) 03:27, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- - Um, where did I ever claim that his book had been reviewed by a blog? The book has multiple reviews in a variety of sources and likely deserves an article in its own right. JoshuaZ (talk) 01:42, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey um.. you linked to the blog... That's kinda the same thing as "claiming that his book had been reviewed by a blog". --Coffee // have a cup // ark // 11:15, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. That one is a blog. Um, Red face. Ok. Hmm. I do have other examples that aren't blogs such as [3] but the put the emphasis on the other author almost completely. Hmm, this argument may not be as strong as I thought it was. The basic thrust that he isn't a BLP1E I think still seems to hold. JoshuaZ (talk) 04:08, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Pure BLP1E. The website, book or accompanying publicity stunt don't convince me as they discuss the product in detail and the creators only in passing. Gazi moff 08:40, 6 November 2009 (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.