Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James C. Russell
without prejudice against recreation in the future if somebody can do a much better job of demonstrating his notability as a writer than this does. While it is true that the article does cite ''one'' review of his written work in a reliable source, it takes more than just one source to make someone notable as a writer — otherwise, his writing is referenced almost entirely to its own publication details as circular verification that it ''exists'', rather than any evidence of independent attention from reliable sources. (Oh, and there's also a |blog. Which doesn't change anything.) And when it comes to his political campaign, that's referenced almost entirely to |primary sources that aren't support for notability at all, except for a tiny smattering of incident coverage that just makes him a . It might be possible to write a better article that more effectively demonstrates his preexisting notability as a writer — I don't have access to the correct sourcing databases needed to answer that question one way or the other myself, but I'm willing to consider that it might be possible — but this article isn't doing that in its current form, and the unsuccessful political campaign is contributing no additional notability points over and above the writing itself
— User:Bearcat, 15:48, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:BLOG||WP:PRIMARYSOURCES||WP:BLP1E (Wikipedia:Verifiability)