Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jason Nitz
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 00:56, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Jason Nitz[edit]
- Jason Nitz (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Disputed "Notability" tag ([1]). I suspect he might be notable in the future, but WP:CRYSTAL applies. No evidence of current notability, but, as ever, happy for the article to be fixed up to demonstrate it. NB also COI article, apparently autobiographical. Dweller (talk) 08:44, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:41, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:41, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Nitz is presently an unremarkable IT professional. Basically a vanity piece, it fails WP:CREATIVE. WWGB (talk) 23:25, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Appears to clearly lack notability. Available references appear to be self-generated publicity for his expedition. Murtoa (talk) 01:48, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per WP:BIO and WP:CRYSTAL (if he might be notable somewhen abf /talk to me/ 10:57, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "'Do Not Delete"' I wouldn't be so quick to judge people's 'day' jobs - Fiennes, Stroud and Jarvis all have day jobs to support the adventures. Article does reference a future piece but historically significant none the less. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aurora Australis (talk • contribs) 01:34, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I'm struggling to see any "historical significance", and as the subject of the article you may not be in the best position to make an unbiased determination. Murtoa (talk) 07:06, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Agreed. Thank you for your unbiased opinion Mr Nitz. WWGB (talk) 13:15, 30 November 2008 (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.