Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Scott-Morgan (2nd nomination)

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. MelanieN (talk) 21:55, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Peter Scott-Morgan

AfDs for this article:

• Articles for deletion/Peter Scott-Morgan
• Articles for deletion/Peter Scott-Morgan (2nd nomination)

Peter Scott-Morgan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Article might not meet notability requirements as per WP:BIO. Tow (talk) 04:25, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

• Delete Concerns about WP:GNG, style and tone. Lack of sourcing outside trade journals, hardly any mentions in mainstream media news articles. Parts of the article are more suitable for a LinkedIn profile than an encyclopedia article. A large chunk of it may have been written by someone with a WP:COI.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 05:22, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2016 May 23. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:41, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:57, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:57, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Management-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:58, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:58, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

• Delete No doubt a very talented individual, but does not meet WP:GNG. Mcewan (talk) 10:18, 24 May 2016 (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.