Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Paczkowski
 | This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2024 March 25. For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. |
- 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. Liz Read! Talk! 22:08, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- John Paczkowski (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I believe Paczkowski fails to meet WP:NJOURNALIST. I tried to see if the subject met WP:GNG during my WP:BEFORE, but it's hard to find WP:RS coverage for the critical late-2000's period and earlier.
Besides that, I found one article about him leaving Buzzfeed News (besides Forbes itself).
The Forbes article would be pretty good at demonstrating The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors
part of NJOURNALIST, but it's from his employer. Another good source in that same type would be , but it has the same issues.
I just don't think the sources are there, but I am happy to be proven wrong. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 18:21, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, Technology, and California. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 18:21, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
- Delete: Tech reporter, plenty of articles by him, nothing about him. No sourcing we can use. Oaktree b (talk) 00:20, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- Delete per Oaktree. Add in unsourced quotes and other puffery about him and article basically adds up to a promotional piece. sixtynine • whaddya want? • 04:26, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- 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.