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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:03, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jim Diamond (magician) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)

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

The article has many self-published claims for notability, which however can not be verified through reliable sources. The only verifiable sentence in the article is in the "Stupidest Statements Awards" section, and the two sources there are heavily based on a press release from the subject, containing no information beyond what was in the press release, and are not actually about the subject but the 2009 awards (WP:BLP1E). There is no source describing this person as a magician or a genius. Actually, there is a lack of any kind of even trivial mentions in (reliable) independent sources.

As I wrote in the DRV, I am not convinced that Jim Diamond the genius and/or the magician even exists. Someone has been marketing products with that persona, though, both off-wiki and on-wiki. Prolog (talk) 01:11, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Selling CDs on how to become a genius, he exist for sure as the seller. No evidence of notability. -RobertMel (talk) 04:13, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as a good rule of thumb, if the mere existence of the subject can't be proved, then that's a good sign that the subject is fundamentally too unverifiable for a Wikipedia article. Stage magicians tend not to be the most publicity-shy folks out there, and I have my doubts that someone could successfully work in that field for 45 years as claimed and yet have no reliable sources for any of it. "The Amazing Mr. Diamond", supposedly his stage name per the article, doesn't come up with anything on Google besides his own site, this article, and some random references to Neil Diamond. "Jim Diamond" +magician similarly comes up empty, with the first hit being an unrelated magician named Diamond Jim Tyler. Nothing at all on Google News either, even going back into the archives. This being a BLP, we need a whole lot more to go on than "Jim's" own website. Another genius once said "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.". So, as always, source it or lose it. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 17:35, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, we don't have proof for anything beyond his existence, and we need a lot more than that for an article. If existence were all that was needed, we could have articles on everyone in the phone book. Nyttend (talk) 02:00, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - the sources provided don't actually relate to him, but to a list of 'stupid statements' which he is apparently responsible for. That may be notable, but the person called Jim Diamond evidently is not. Robofish (talk) 23:44, 14 March 2010 (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.