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. (non-admin closure) Bmusician 04:35, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bill Andriette (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Being a spokesman for the North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) is not enough to create the presumption of notability; and although references to him can be found, the sources do not provide significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject as required by WP:BIO. Nonogyro (talk) 18:26, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose - Five printed sources seem quite enough for an article to me. Toa Nidhiki05 18:58, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect - Redirect to the NAMBLA article; he doesn't seem independently notable (that is, in his own right) beyond being a spokesman for a group. From what I can tell, most of the coverage being cited centers on his role within/surrounding NAMBLA rather than him independently.Tyrenon (talk) 19:42, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - There are enough reliable sources which establish notability. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:53, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: more than enough coverage in WP:RS to satisfy notability WP:BASIC. Lionelt ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:55, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Comment: The sources provide trivial mentions only, and do not provide significant coverage "that address the subject directly in detail". Nonogyro (talk) 21:01, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:55, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. Overdrawn Invader (talk) 21:03, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Sufficient RS coverage.--Epeefleche (talk) 20:51, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. There are sufficient WP:RS to establish notability. Qworty (talk) 06:50, 12 February 2012 (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.