Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nick Pelling
I'm coming here from Talk:Voynich manuscript, where NP stated, "I am currently trying to find clickable versions of the 20+ newspaper articles where I have been interviewed and quoted at length." The claim, in and of itself, seems to confer notability. However, I looked at otability (people).  seems to fail. Pelling's claim is newspaper interviews, and interviews would not be secondary sources. An interviewer is usually not critiquing his subject.  Newspaper interviews about technical subjects would not usually have the interviewer being an expert in the field. Primary sources do not contribute to notability.  seems to fail: there are no awards and there does not seem to be any widely recognized achievement. Coining "gamification" can be covered in that article; the book ''Gamification: A Simple Introduction'' by Andrzej Marczewski mentions Pelling in passing in the foreword, but apparently nowhere else; the comments suggest others developed the field. Being an early game programmer needs context. Are the games significant in their own right? Writing a program or developing a product does not imply notability. Trevj's comment re Acorn can go either way: is it stature from other gamers or more newspaper-style interviews. Is it a narrow trade pub? The comment by Bash raises a question about NP and Acornsoft: is NP one of many programmers developing the games or is he the sole developer? NP is not pointing to significant achievements in game programming. NP is not claiming patents or significant developments. The article uses computer games to claim notability, but neither Pelling nor Pilchard are mentioned in that article. Neither is there mention in BBC Micro. The game Elite (video game) (not developed by NP) is mentioned, and that article did not have trouble pulling up sources (the game was put on many platforms). NP holds himself out as an expert and a researcher on the VM, but nothing suggests that otability (academics) applies. I don't think there's any claim to writing referreed papers for Crypto or other significant cryptographic pubs. / does not seem to hold for VM (regarded as an important figure; widely cited; peers/successors reference his work; significant theory or technique). Blogs and self-published works are not evidence for N. Where is a secondary source that confers statutre on NP? Maybe there's a little more for gaming, but I'm ignorant there. I suspect there have been many books written about programming games; if NP was prominent, then why isn't he mentioned in them? I'm leaning delete
— User:Glrx, 22:31, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:N||WP:BASIC||WP:ANYBIO||WP:N||WP:AUTHOR||WP:CREATIVE (Wikipedia:Notability)