Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert Oulds

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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 13:33, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Oulds

Robert Oulds (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)

Notable only for being Director of the Bruges Group, which has its own article. Any significant press mentions appear to be when he is speaking on behalf of that organisation, and I believe the Bruges Group article covers this appropriately.

His career as a journalist and author is not notable. As a politician, it is not notable in itself to be a councillor or cabinet member in a local authority, nor is it notable to be a prospective parliamentary candidate. Being a standard bearer for the RBL certainly is not notable. Shritwod (talk) 03:13, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 06:53, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 06:53, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 06:53, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:23, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Nothing stated in the article hands him an automatic "inherently notable" freebie just because he exists, but the sourcing isn't cutting it in terms of getting him over WP:GNG: it's far too dependent on primary sources rather than reliable ones — a person is not notable as a company director just because the fact can technically be referenced to the company's own self-published website about itself, and neither is he notable as a writer just because the fact that he wrote a book can be metareferenced to itself — but the few sources which are actually reliable ones just make him a WP:BLP1E rather than a ten-year test passing topic of enduring permanent notability. Bearcat (talk) 15:53, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I searched for the books, and found almost no citations, or press coverage, fails WP:AUTHOR. His political career is minor and locak, and he fails WP:SIGCOV.E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:50, 14 August 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.