Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Benjamin Boas

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 no consensus. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:22, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Benjamin Boas

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Benjamin Boas (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)

The subject fails WP:GNG. No credible claim of notability. Several sources fail significant coverage. Likely self-promotion. Solopsist (talk) 23:12, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:23, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:23, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

• Delete we lack actual indepth secondary third party coverage of the kind that would show notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:30, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
• Keep Article creator here. It's not so hard to find significant third party coverage.
  • A 22-page featured interview by Akiho Suzuki, "EJ Interview 2: ベンジャミン・ボアズ (Benjamin Boas)", English Journal September 2017 issue, pp.59-80 https://www.amazon.co.jp/dp/B073LGMV1Q
  • A four-page article on a monthly magazine from Kadokawa: Da Vinci issue 257, September 2015, pp. 36-39 https://www.amazon.co.jp/dp/B011U6MT7Y
  • An article from Nakano Keizai Shimbun https://nakano.keizai.biz/headline/983/

In particular, the English Journal interview is a fantastic in-depth article, but I didn't cite it to support my statements because it's a paper magazine in Japanese and hard to get hold of unless you actually go to a library in Japan. However, reading the exact wording of Wikipedia:Verifiability#Non-English_sources, I probably should. --朝彦 | Asahiko (talk) 03:37, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

• Delete per Johnpacklambert. --Puzzledvegetable^{Is it teatime already?} 13:51, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 08:52, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One last relist, since the first relist garnered no new participation.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BD2412 T 00:35, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

• Keep, while an interview is a primary source and does not contribute to notability, the articles in Kadokawa and Nakano Keizai Shimbun are significant coverage, meaning he passes GNG. Devonian Wombat (talk) 01:39, 29 June 2020 (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.