Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nick Seddon

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 keep. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:56, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Seddon

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

Not enough information for this article. TheEpTic (talk) 15:07, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Add more information, it is a valid topic and while he doesn't have much significance, he definitely does have a role in politics. --MrRatermat2 (talk) 15:36, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:28, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:28, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:28, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:28, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Certainly notable and there is a great deal more out there about him. 'Not enough information' is only a consideration at AfD in the rare instances, usually historical figures and the like, where we can be reasonably certain that reliable sources do not exist, or what little is known can most sensibly be incorporated in another article. Mr Seddon has written, and been written about, a great deal and at times he has himself been the story. --AJHingston (talk) 00:59, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 02:05, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The sources in the article indicate that he is a political figure at a national level, has been covered in multiple, non-trivial press mentions and writes for a national newspaper. That combines to push him through the "notability barrier". ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 18:16, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's obvious that there is and will be much more to say about him. Can we take him off the deletion list?Rathfelder (talk) 21:21, 26 December 2013 (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.