- 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 --slakr\ talk / 11:23, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Jan Wildt (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
There are a few news hits but they link to reviews he wrote, not anything about his published works. A book search is primarily false positives, with the possible exception of the horror compilation. An LOC search doesn't indicate promise. I see no evidence he passes WP:BIO for creative professionals. Travellingcari (talk) 18:11, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, jonny-mt 16:02, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Does not seem to pass WP:BIO, and also no hits in the searches provided in the nomination. STORMTRACKER 94 Go Sox! 16:22, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom - even the article itself states that his publishings are "scant." Not a notable person. ♣♦ SmartGuy ♥♠ 16:24, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete As the subject of this "biographical article", I support its deletion. It contains inaccuracies, and the work is more important than the person. Wikipediphiles, do your duty! Jan Wildt 15:25, 25 February 2008
- 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.