Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonathan Green (writer)
In answer to the above editor self-identifying as the subject, this procedure will be discussing whether or not to delete, keep, or take other action to the pagespace. Wikipedians tend to appreciate boldness and truthfulness, so I for one appreciate your interest in the subject matter. It's clear the subject exists and is well-published. I'm going to provide some shortcuts to relevant guidelines and policy as I write so you can follow the discussion better. Several issues arise immediately: self-identifying as the page subject (a claim we will be in no position to verify), your opinions would be subject to scrutiny through the prism of . I appreciate that you state you haven't been involved with the article, and that's generally a good practice. The issues which confront us in this discussion relate to  and . The specific secondary notability criteria  applies to creative professionals. Lots of amazing and impressive individuals do not meet the criteria for inclusion in an encyclopedia. What is under discussion is whether there are sources meeting the  criteria to verify page assertions and to assert notability sufficient for retention. Search engine results are tricky in this case because the name combination is so common. While your direct participation on the page or in this discussion may not be appropriate as the page subject, if you'd like to add some really good sources in a section of the talk page, this may help us discuss the key issues. Please read the link to reliable above to help you see what we'd be looking for
— User:BusterD, 18:40, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:COI||WP:VERIFIABILITY||WP:NOTABILITY||WP:AUTHOR||WP:RELIABLE (Wikipedia:Conflict of interest)