Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Shankbone
Wikipedia:Deletion guidelines for administrators: ''Consensus is not determined by counting heads, but by looking at strength of argument, and underlying policy (if any). Arguments that contradict policy, are based on opinion rather than fact, or are logically fallacious, are frequently discounted.'' There are a lot of arguments either discussing notability without regard to what  or  actually say, or even contradicting them. At the same time, we have plenty of Keep editors citing  on the necessary amount of sourcing, and citing the ''Columbia Journalism Review'' article as meeting the criteria for , so what value should the closing admin put on Delete comments that ignore this? Strong "delete" arguments would discuss the ''CJR'' article. (Tarc's argument does this, and I don't think it can be discounted.) Comments that amount to  should be totally discounted. This shouldn't be a popularity contest
— User:JohnWBarber, 18:55, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:N||WP:BIO||WP:IDONTLIKEIT (Wikipedia:Notability)