Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tallis Barker

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. ✗plicit 00:12, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tallis Barker

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

There do not appear to be sufficient reliable sources available to support GNG for this subject; the sources cited are self-published, minor mentions, or unreliable. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:11, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Bands and musicians, Health and fitness, Medicine, and England. Skynxnex (talk) 00:33, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback. I understand the notability concerns and am working to improve sourcing. That said, moving directly to an AfD nomination — without first suggesting tags or improvements — seemed somewhat premature, especially given that the subject has a long-standing career that began before the digital documentation era.

Tallis Barker performed widely in the US and UK, taught at Oxford, and is now known for his work in therapeutic fasting and integrative health. While some of his contributions are outside traditional academic or media channels, they reflect a cross-disciplinary profile that may merit consideration under broader notability criteria.

I’d appreciate any constructive input on how to strengthen the article to meet guidelines, and I’m happy to collaborate further. Thank you! Rekaga71 (talk) 07:34, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

First you can actually type your words in rather than talk through an LLM, as it's clear none of that was self-written. We don't talk to robots. Nathannah • 📮 16:04, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nathannah: I am not a robot! Just to make it clear: while I asked for help for my response in English — which is not my native language — the content and reasoning are entirely my own. Using tools to assist with tone and clarity is not against policy, and doesn’t make the contribution less valid. Let’s stay focused on the substance of the discussion, please. Rekaga71 (talk) 16:35, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:AITALK, talk page comments should be human-written. It's fine if you have some spelling and grammar mistakes. Do not use AI to write or rewrite your comments in the future. ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 19:04, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Hints of notability [1] but there's a lack of sourcing to show notability. Doesn't seem to meet academic notability as I can't find much on his publications. Oaktree b (talk) 14:06, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The thesis is listed on Wikidata (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q59575109), and was originally added by a third party back in 2018. Rekaga71 (talk) 16:39, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I know, I've been informed (by having some of my articles deleted/declined at creation) that having a listing in Wikidata isn't a mark of notability here, it's only to help locate resources on a subject. This was a source of much frustration when I contributed to the articles for creation process; having an article in Wikipedia hinges on having sources that meet our reliability requirements. Oaktree b (talk) 17:25, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks sharing, and for clarifying that. I mentioned the thesis entry because it had been independently added years ago, which seemed to suggest third-party interest. Rekaga71 (talk) 13:14, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. No SIGCOV found, searched the WP library as well. The tone of the article also seems promotional in nature. Isaidnoway (talk) 16:43, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for checking those details. Pleae let me know where exactly you found the tone to be "promotional", and I will correct it. This was not my intention. Thanks. Rekaga71 (talk) 13:10, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Conducted a BEFORE search and not able to find significant coverage about the topic to meet general notability guidelines and to establish its notability. Fade258 (talk) 01:14, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:TOOSOON. If his thesis was published only 7 years ago, and his first public lecture was this month, then he's not ready yet for inclusion based on WP:PROF. Bearian (talk) 07:11, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for checking, but it's incorrect, I'm not sure where the "7 years" came from. His thesis was published in 1996, and his first public lecture 19 years ago ---- as I mentioned above, the difficulty is to find online sources for his work from that period. But I'd argue that not having those does not make him less notable. Rekaga71 (talk) 13:07, 11 July 2025 (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.