Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hamish Thompson

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Tone 20:23, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hamish Thompson

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is primarily self advertising, and there is no evidence for notability-- Except for two minor awards, and a number of mentions. Most of the article consist of his own claims for his ownwork DGG ( talk ) 16:29, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve now thoroughly read the Wikipedia delete guidelines.
Firstly, it recommends doing a google search to check for notability. A quick google search for “Hamish Thompson“ with a key word like ‘PR’, ‘buzzwords’ etc will find multiple independent references to Thompson, particularly in national newspaper articles.
Secondly, it recommends allowing new editors time to improve an article before nominating for deleting. I would suggest that I have made progress in this, and I’d be extremely grateful for guidance on making more.
Thirdly, the inclusion of the awards is to prove that Thompson is creator of the stunts/campaigns as the news coverage itself doesn’t mention him.Florapostewrites (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:02, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, PR --Devokewater @ 16:48, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fluff. No evidence that he actually stands out among the people whose job it is to draw attention. XOR'easter (talk) 16:58, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think as a stunt creator, he is worthy of inclusion. Perhaps the article should just focus on that. His stunts have been reported around the world. I can add plenty of other citations to support this. He is also recognised as a PR expert (e.g. the episode of Word of Mouth where he was solo guest talking to Michael Rosen and Dr Laura Wright). Florapostewrites (talk) 17:11, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Media-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 17:24, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Author-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 17:24, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 17:24, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 17:24, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've now added more examples of Thompson's publicity stunts with links to newspaper articles directly attributing them to him. Florapostewrites (talk) 18:04, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I've now stripped out anything that couldn't be independently verified. Added more citations. I also noticed I'd linked to a 5-minute extract of the Word of Mouth episode in which Thompson was the sole guest. I've now linked to the whole programme. Someone had already flagged Thompson for possible inclusion in the Australia project, before the article was flagged for possible deletion. Florapostewrites (talk) 07:37, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Complete fail of WP:BASIC and has to be one of the worst self promotion articles I've read. PR agents always get mentions in tabloids since their literal job is to grab attention, unfortunately there is nothing that concretely suggests he's any more notable than the majority. GN-z11 ^☎ ^★ 18:59, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, many of the stunts don't mention the publicist, instead quoting the CEO or spokesperson for the organisation. [Note: I didn't include a number of notable stunts that don't mention Thompson in news articles, so can't be independently verified.] Thompson's worth for inclusion is due to creating the ideas behind the stunts and being seen as an influential thinker on public relations. I initially wrote the article badly (I'm fairly new to this), but think in its present form Thompson is worth an article. If he isn't, can you explain why a publicist such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Borkowski is worthy of one? Florapostewrites (talk) 09:18, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What would be really useful is some guidance on what to include: I think the most significant contributions Thompson has made are: (1) the death of the VCR, a campaign which went directly against previous PR orthodoxy (ie you never say something is becoming obsolete); and (2) the John Lewis Make Do or Mend campaign, which reinvigorated the culture of mending belongings instead of throwing them away and buying new. That, combined with being recognised as an expert on media and public relations, seems Wikipedia-worthy. Florapostewrites (talk) 09:53, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
With reference to the comment about PR agents appearing in tabloids: Thompson has been invited to talk about language on BBC Radio 4 Today Programme, BBC Radio 4 Word of Mouth, ABC Australian National radio, New Zealand national radio. His opinion/research about jargon has been been quoted by linguist https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Thorne and in books and academic articles. Thompson has written for The Independent. None of these are tabloids; and in all of these cases was he was acting as an expert or pundit, not a PR agent. [note: links to all of these are in the references to the article.]

Florapostewrites (talk) 06:42, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.