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) –Davey2010 • (talk) 23:51, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Hogben (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)

Fails WP:GNG. Launchballer 14:33, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 15:37, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 15:37, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:59, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - The subject meets WP:BASIC. Source examples include [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:35, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Note. This is a foundational copyvio by paid editor Trident13. It's without footnotes, and appallingly badly written: "Born in Foord Road in Folkestone, Kent, Hogben's mother died ..." - why should we care where his mother was born? I don't think there's much doubt that the topic is notable. WP:TNT seems the best way forward, or else a rewrite from scratch at Talk:Michael Hogben/Temp, if anyone feels like it. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:31, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:30, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - The general interest articles do not qualify as "secondary sources" and do not themselves support "notability". Further the referenced articles are not integrated into the Wikipedia article but are just listed under references. Is this the work of a publicist?--Rpclod (talk) 03:17, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - The sources provided in my !vote above are from independent, reliable secondary news sources. They certainly serve to establish notability for the subject. Please consider reading Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:26, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:21, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. He's a well enough known TV personality with sufficient coverage in reliable sources to have an article. --Michig (talk) 09:01, 22 July 2014 (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.