Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greg Atkinson

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. Tone 17:27, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Greg Atkinson

[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)

Non-notable author lacking in-depth, non-trivial support. A majority of the references are work product. reddogsix (talk) 19:22, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep is notable within the Christian community and a published author and has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his specific field. Shows in Google Scholar as being cited, is regarded as an important figure and passes WP:AUTHOR. --Barbarabcarneiro (talk) 23:23, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:01, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:01, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Carolina-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:01, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as WP:PROMO, he has gotten a little coverage, Baptist News Global: ‘Secret church shopper’ reports quality of welcome determines if guests will visit a second time. but not enough to pass WP:SIGCOV. However, because Greg Atkinson is such a common name (there's a chef in Seattle named Greg Atkinson who may well be notable enough to have a page,) that somebody may be able to source it. Feel free to flag me to reconsider if you think you have been able to show WP:SIGCOV.E.M.Gregory (talk) 12:16, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(I was flagged on my talk page and invited to revisit) Noting that the The Joplin Globe, the daily paper in the city where he is pastor of quite a large church (3 churches, a couple of thousand member - a sort of smallish megachurch). This is local coverage, WP:HEYMANN, I'd particularly need to see WP:SIGCOV of some aspect of his career in publications not located in Joplin, Missouri. User:Barbarabcarneiro, if can find such sources and want to make a really persuasive argument for notability, it would also be a really good idea to remove the WP:PROMO from the page. This includes both the ADVERT tone, and a good deal of the content. A good rule of thumb is: if you can't source it to WP:RS (2 such sources per fact or accomplishment are preferable,) it doesn't belong on the page.E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:24, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
E.M.Gregory I'll work on rewriting it later today. Could you please check the new sources? I've added two from Baptist News and one from Christianity Post. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Barbarabcarneiro (talk • contribs) 17:45, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Christian Post is a WP:RS. it is one of the first places I search when an Evangelical pastor or author turns up at AfD. however, the article you added is not a reported piece of journalism, it is a blog post. Like Forbes, CP hosts columns (iPost) by unpaid writers. These are not RS and do not establish notability. The Forbes story in the article looks PRIMARY to me. CP published a 2007 reported article that quoted Atkinson.E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:14, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
E.M.Gregory here are two that mention him as a Christian leader and influencer: https://www.christianpost.com/news/new-website-connects-blogging-pastors-to-utilize-experiences-40381/ and https://www.christianpost.com/news/mushroom-eaters-media-savvy-churches-can-expand-god-146-s-kingdom-25921/. Are these worth adding? I'm still working on editing to remove WP:PROMO but it probably won't be until tomorrow. Barbarabcarneiro (talk) 20:45, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

in re: notability, what is really needed is stuff like profile articles, reviews of his books in WP:RS, WP:SIGCOV of his books in feature stories, and INDEPTH coverage of his career or of some aspect of his career - especially in books or scholar.y journals. Also, he has founded a couple of organizations, and headed a large church, Forest Park Carthage. The thing is, writing books and articles, leading a large chursh, founding an organization like exPastors.org is important work, but it is not WP:NOTABLE unless there is WP:SIGCOV of it.E.M.Gregory (talk) 21:02, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

E.M.Gregory sorry to tag you again, but I keep finding new stuff and appreciate your input. I believe these could help as well (https://www.christianitytoday.com/pastors/2017/december-web-exclusives/ct-pastors-top-17-articles-of-2017.html voted as one of 17 of the top posts of 2017 for Christianity Today, http://ipost.christianpost.com/post/going-digital-for-his-kingdom listed as a speaker for a conference on Christian Post) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Barbarabcarneiro (talk • contribs) 21:21, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 11:07, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 19:36, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - The article as it stands has a highly promotional tone. It should be deleted and the creator should start again from scratch. Deb (talk) 07:37, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Further to this, there is, I believe, a conflict of interest. Deb (talk) 07:39, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, an advert for his books, many of the book links were removed but I can't escape the conclusion this is a coi promo. Szzuk (talk) 22:06, 6 October 2018 (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.