Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andy Radford
Putting out multiple books and a DVD does not automatically give you notability. You have to prove through multiple independent and reliable sources that Radford is a notable author in his field. Being on television doesn't guarantee notability either. There are plenty of people who have been in or made shows that do not meet notability guidelines. You have to prove that he's a bestseller through links that are not put out by the author, his company, or any sort of promotional or vanity links. Even then, being a bestseller doesn't usually guarantee you notability unless it's in a high profile venue such as the NYT Bestseller list. As far as other articles go, odds are that those articles don't warrant an entry on here and if you see any articles that you don't think passes notability guidelines, please feel free to put those up for deletion or bring them to the attention of someone who frequently participates in discussions. Saying "that stuff exists" () means that Radford deserves an article is not a valid argument. As far as defining notability goes, please check out ,, and . They provide an excellent definition of what passes notability guidelines. Please understand that none of this is done to be hostile or ugly, this is just the way wikipedia works. Radford might seem notable to you as an individual (especially if you are closely involved with him or are the author himself), but that doesn't mean that he's notable as far as Wikipedia goes. Believe me, there's a lot of people I think should be on here that don't qualify under notability guidelines but that's just how the system here works and I have to go along with it
— User:Tokyogirl79, 05:10, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS||WP:GNG||WP:BIO||WP:AUTHOR (Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions)