Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert Booth
Sulfur: The |notability page you cite weakens your position and strengthens mine.  It begins by stating clearly that what follows is a “guideline” and “not Wikipedia policy,” adding that “the whole concept of notability is contentious.”  You then take the reference to published authors out of context.  The entire standard suggested includes those “who have written books with an audience of 5,000 or more '''or''' in periodicals with a circulation of 5,000 or more.”  Booth’s op-ed pieces have appeared in the ''Chicago Tribune,'' ''Miami Herald,'' ''St. Petersburg Times,'' ''Atlanta Constitution'' and ''Tampa Tribune'' (which has also reviewed ''The Perfect Pafko'').  All of those publications far exceed the 5,000 circulation standard.  Finally, the notability page you cite suggests that those feeling a notability standard is not being met, “may wish to explain your position to the user, before nominating it for deletion.”  Instead, you pounced immediately on the deletion option. Why?  Is this your regular MO on Wikipedia?  Would it not have been more prudent to contact me first?  That would have allowed the two people who care most about this to dialogue directly on it.  As a result, a person of your considerable intelligence would have seen quickly how flimsy the notability argument is and never have put this listing up for deletion consideration
— User:Robertbo, 21:09, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:BIO (Wikipedia:Notability)