409:, delete, next" -- so I dunno if further analysis is worthwhile. Will we be deleting an important published expert in an important field? I... yeah, maybe. But there's only so much vetting of 2-reader-a-day articles that people are willing to spend time on. I'm not. It is what it is. My work here is done, carry on!
497:
is a brief remembrance. Maybe there's more. I'm OK with "Jeff Mayo was a person, here's his vital stats, he founded and ran such-and-so important school, and wrote some important books, and here's a list of them." That's useful data. You don't have to agree and that's fine too.
326:
On the other hand, the Mayo School has existed for a half-century now and seems to be a real place with real teachers and real classes and so forth, I guess. I would image that (astrology not being a hot high-demand field I suppose) it must be one of the larger schools in the
319:
It's too short to be a very good article. There doesn't seem much to say about Mr Mayo. The article is really just a stand in for the school, which had an article which was deleted. I don't know if there's ref'd material out there to expand the article -- quite possibly
330:
The page views is running two a day, which is quite low. On the other hand, why do we need to tell even these two people "Oh, read about Jeff Mayo or the Mayo School and want to found out what he/it is, did you? Well go pound sand cos we're tired of telling
385:
So he's not running these off on a mimeograph in his mom's basement, and maybe he's a real expert in this (old and famous and historically important, if now rather niche and outré) field. It looks like that one book is a (scholarly?) analysis of
488:
puts it, the question is "Does it make
Knowledge better or not? If yes, keep the article". It says here people searching on the string "jeff mayo" will be better served by this page than getting a "page does not exist" message. Prove me wrong.
338:
other hand, Google has not really heard of this guy or this school. "'Jeff Mayo' -wikipedia" is all about a veterinarian in
Washington State and a school official in Tennessee. So he doesn't appear to be capable of meeting
219:
590:
sources. Google
Scholar has a few citations, many are not peer reviewed journals. The references in possibly peer reviewed journals are at best trivial. The article meets none of the criteria listed at
476:
Yeah, it is inconsistent with GNG. That's certainly a serious issue, yes. GNG is s guideline, and it's an important one I've referenced often. It's an important guideline but still guideline, and
405:
can't decide, not without more research. But, the article is obviously going to be deleted, simply by the more or less autonomic functioning of the
Knowledge nervous system -- "Does not meet
86:
615:
for the school, the man himself does not seem very notable, and since he's been dead for twenty years it seems unlikely that he will do anything to become notable in the future.
292:
180:
586:. Newspapers.com has a few trivial mentions of "Jeff Mayo Astrology", but I found no reviews of his work or articles about him. Searching Google for the same found no
351:
323:
And FWIW the school may have been a promotional article, which means this one would be too. With commercial entities that always something to consider, at the margins.
213:
271:
127:
112:
81:
428:
at this point, it's been a week and nobody seems to care about it either way, so the default would be "no change" and anyway the article is not
250:
No evidence of any notability. Unsourced since 2006 and searches only reveal the usual social media sites and book sellers, nothing more. Fails
566:
571:
316:
I don't have a strong opinion. It's certainly marginal at best and the loss of the article would cost us little. So let's see...
107:
100:
17:
627:
603:
576:
537:
507:
471:
457:- you are going for Keep for an article with zero sources and zero searchable sources? This seems wholly inconsistent with
441:
418:
305:
284:
263:
65:
153:
148:
526:
234:
157:
201:
121:
117:
355:
546:
140:
644:
40:
561:
362:
also published some, and altho they're an "indy" publisher they're real and established with a good catalog.
195:
359:
61:
640:
503:
437:
414:
36:
373:
388:
364:
191:
354:
is apparently related to
Penguin Books or maybe to C W Daniel which was bought by Random House, and
144:
556:
227:
350:
other other hand, it appears that his books have been published by actual reputable publishers...
612:
241:
136:
71:
96:
57:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
639:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
461:. Please can you provide a rationale for this based on Knowledge policy and guidance please?
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
592:
522:
499:
454:
433:
410:
599:
623:
369:
207:
477:
458:
432:
anyone I guess, so you can count me in the Keep league for the purposes of deciding.
406:
392:, which was written in the early 18th century and has a an article here, so it's not
340:
251:
53:
587:
485:
465:
299:
278:
257:
174:
490:
531:
595:
358:
was apparently first published by the
University of California, or something.
617:
494:
635:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
343:, not even close, unless some extensive digging is done maybe.
549:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
170:
166:
162:
226:
555:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
293:
list of United
Kingdom-related deletion discussions
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
647:). No further edits should be made to this page.
291:Note: This discussion has been included in the
270:Note: This discussion has been included in the
87:Articles for deletion/Jeff Mayo (2nd nomination)
240:
8:
272:list of Authors-related deletion discussions
128:Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
52:. There is consensus that the subject fails
290:
269:
79:
7:
78:
372:which was apparently bought up by
24:
113:Introduction to deletion process
493:is a blurb and chart for mayo,
352:Astrology: A Key to Personality
82:Articles for deletion/Jeff Mayo
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
628:21:07, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
604:15:24, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
577:02:51, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
538:14:30, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
508:21:56, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
472:17:50, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
442:17:31, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
419:14:16, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
306:12:34, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
285:12:34, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
264:12:34, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
66:09:09, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
103:(AfD)? Read these primers!
664:
370:English Universities Press
484:, and a core one, and as
356:How to Read the Ephemeris
637:Please do not modify it.
365:Teach Yourself Astrology
32:Please do not modify it.
374:Hodder & Stoughton
360:Shambhala Publications
77:AfDs for this article:
368:was published by the
101:Articles for deletion
611:. This looks like a
389:Raphael's Ephemeris
579:
308:
287:
118:Guide to deletion
108:How to contribute
655:
554:
552:
550:
534:
470:
401:OK. So, hmmm. I
376:, a legit press.
304:
283:
262:
245:
244:
230:
178:
160:
98:
34:
663:
662:
658:
657:
656:
654:
653:
652:
651:
645:deletion review
580:
545:
543:
532:
462:
296:
275:
254:
187:
151:
135:
132:
95:
92:
75:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
661:
659:
650:
649:
631:
630:
606:
553:
542:
541:
540:
515:
514:
513:
512:
511:
510:
445:
444:
422:
421:
399:
398:
397:
380:
379:
378:
377:
344:
332:
328:
324:
321:
310:
309:
288:
248:
247:
184:
131:
130:
125:
115:
110:
93:
91:
90:
89:
84:
76:
74:
69:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
660:
648:
646:
642:
638:
633:
632:
629:
626:
625:
620:
619:
614:
610:
607:
605:
601:
597:
594:
589:
585:
582:
581:
578:
575:
574:
570:
569:
565:
564:
560:
559:
551:
548:
539:
536:
535:
528:
524:
520:
517:
516:
509:
505:
501:
496:
492:
487:
483:
479:
475:
474:
473:
469:
468:
467:
460:
456:
452:
449:
448:
447:
446:
443:
439:
435:
431:
427:
424:
423:
420:
416:
412:
408:
404:
400:
395:
391:
390:
384:
383:
382:
381:
375:
371:
367:
366:
361:
357:
353:
349:
345:
342:
337:
333:
329:
325:
322:
318:
317:
315:
312:
311:
307:
303:
302:
301:
294:
289:
286:
282:
281:
280:
273:
268:
267:
266:
265:
261:
260:
259:
253:
243:
239:
236:
233:
229:
225:
221:
218:
215:
212:
209:
206:
203:
200:
197:
193:
190:
189:Find sources:
185:
182:
176:
172:
168:
164:
159:
155:
150:
146:
142:
138:
134:
133:
129:
126:
123:
119:
116:
114:
111:
109:
106:
105:
104:
102:
97:
88:
85:
83:
80:
73:
70:
68:
67:
63:
59:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
636:
634:
622:
616:
608:
583:
572:
567:
562:
557:
544:
530:
521:fails GNG. (
518:
481:
464:
463:
450:
429:
425:
402:
393:
387:
363:
347:
335:
313:
298:
297:
277:
276:
256:
255:
249:
237:
231:
223:
216:
210:
204:
198:
188:
94:
58:Pax:Vobiscum
49:
47:
31:
28:
613:WP:COATRACK
500:Herostratus
455:Herostratus
434:Herostratus
426:Advise Keep
411:Herostratus
214:free images
641:talk page
593:WP:AUTHOR
558:King of ♥
137:Jeff Mayo
72:Jeff Mayo
37:talk page
643:or in a
547:Relisted
396:I guess.
181:View log
122:glossary
39:or in a
466:Velella
451:Comment
430:hurting
394:nothing
346:On the
334:On the
300:Velella
279:Velella
258:Velella
220:WP refs
208:scholar
154:protect
149:history
99:New to
609:Delete
584:Delete
533:buidhe
519:Delete
482:policy
478:WP:IAR
459:WP:GNG
407:WP:GNG
341:WP:BIO
327:field.
252:WP:GNG
192:Google
158:delete
54:WP:GNG
50:delete
596:Cxbrx
588:WP:RS
486:WP:1Q
480:is a
403:still
348:other
336:other
331:you."
235:JSTOR
196:books
175:views
167:watch
163:links
16:<
600:talk
504:talk
495:here
491:here
438:talk
415:talk
320:not.
314:Well
228:FENS
202:news
171:logs
145:talk
141:edit
62:talk
242:TWL
179:– (
618:jp
602:)
529:)
525:·
506:)
453:-
440:)
417:)
295:.
274:.
222:)
173:|
169:|
165:|
161:|
156:|
152:|
147:|
143:|
64:)
56:.
624:g
621:×
598:(
573:♠
568:♣
563:♦
527:c
523:t
502:(
436:(
413:(
246:)
238:·
232:·
224:·
217:·
211:·
205:·
199:·
194:(
186:(
183:)
177:)
139:(
124:)
120:(
60:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.