Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nathan Dylan Goodwin
I agree that the article still contains promotional language, and is written from the point of view of someone connected to the subject. However, I do see "multiple independent periodical articles or reviews", sufficient to satisfy . Genealogical society journals are periodicals. Some of the reviews included are from societies of which Goodwin is a member (Kent and Norfolk), so 3 of the reviews can't be considered independent. That still leaves at least 14 reviews from places such as Boulder, Colorado; Bergen County, New Jersey; Livermore, California; Cardiganshire, Wales; Wakefield, West Yorkshire; and Cheshire; as well as national UK genealogy magazines ''Family Tree Magazine'', ''Your Family Tree'', and ''Your Family History Magazine''. I don't see a requirement in  for reviews to be in "book journals", and newspaper reviews are generally considered acceptable, so I don't see why genealogical journals and magazines shouldn't be, especially when they are from such a wide geographical range and include national titles. The article does still need clean-up, and it would be better to have information from the reviews about the books and characters
— User:RebeccaGreen, 13:41, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:NAUTHOR||WP:NAUTHOR (Wikipedia:Notability)