Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Businesspeople

WP:DSBOSS

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Businesspeople. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Businesspeople|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Businesspeople. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Purge page cache

watch

This list is included in more general lists of business-related deletions and people for deletion.

Businesspeople

Lisa Sharkey

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

A non-notable businessperson fails WP:GNG, WP:NBIO; contested draftification returned to mainspace with no improvements. The sources are all WP:PRIMARYSOURCE Q&A interviews ([1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]; routine news in WP:TRADES publications ([7]); non-independent affiliated sources/official bios ([8], [9], [10], [11]); and WP:TRIVIALMENTIONs ([12], [13], [14]). A non-bylined piece in WP:FORBES is not considered reliable. There is also a WP:FOXNEWS profile that reads like churnalism (it is almost entirely based on comments she posted on Facebook). Both Forbes and Fox are of questionable reliability per WP:RSP. Meanwhile, in my WP:BEFORE search I looked for evidence that her book Dreaming Green had been reviewed, but I only found one independent reliable source review and thus she does not qualify under WP:NAUTHOR. Finally, the article claims she is an Emmy and Peabody winner, but the sources for this claim are all affiliated with her (usually her official bio provided with speaking engagements and press releases). The Emmy site does not list her in its list of winners and nominees. (It appears that she may have won a NY Regional Emmy as part of a larger news team, which is generally not considered the kind of "major award" to qualify one under WP:ANYBIO.) She also does not appear in the search results for Peabody award winners or on the Dupont Award's website. Overall, no sources that are both reliable and independent validate her claims to major awards. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:15, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, News media, and New York. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:15, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I at least found some more for the book.

Unsure currently about awards and things. Silver seren^C 23:51, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Ivanoff

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

While my main concern with the page is its lack of notability as per WP:BIO, I noticed the page is outdated and needs copy editing, among other problems.

Even if it meets the notability guideline for biographies, it'll need cleanup as per WP:BLP. Duke of New Gwynedd (talk | contrib.) 16:41, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Business, and United States of America. Duke of New Gwynedd (talk | contrib.) 16:41, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Ammann & Whitney per WP:ATD. The sources are pretty much all press releases and lack independence. I could find no WP:SIGCOV.4meter4 (talk) 17:29, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to Ammann & Whitney. Being outdated and needing copy editing are not a concern as they are easily addressed, but notability independent of the firm is. MarcGarver (talk) 17:46, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:34, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gilman Louie

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

non-notable person who created an article about themselves. 1keyhole (talk) 05:59, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep The article has been expanded since creation, and Gilmanl's current authorship is around 3%, so I'm not too concerned there. Notability is the bigger concern. The coverage in The Christian Science Monitor is significant, reliable (see WP:CSMONITOR), secondary, and independent. Finding a second source is harder. Most other sources the article cites are not independent, unless the government [15] counts as independent. A Vox article [16] I found may have significant enough coverage, or it may not. More than one sentence addresses Louie directly. Regardless, being on the Foreign Affairs Policy Board might mean WP:NPOL applies. I'm at a weak keep for now. PrinceTortoise (he/him) ^{(poke • inspect)} 07:25, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Video games, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:54, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

William Asa Vines

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

Not notable business person. Lost in Quebec (talk) 09:51, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Texas. Lost in Quebec (talk) 09:51, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Alabama-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:48, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Grema Sulaiman

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

All the sources Fail WP: GNG. Being a director of a non-notable organization does not count toward WP:SNG. Ibjaja055 (talk) 05:05, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Nigeria. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:06, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

'Keep '-The subject is of high notability in the Federal Republic of Nigeria. He is a prominent energy figure who advocated for the establishment of key energy initiatives, including the Nigeria Energy Transition Fund (NET-FUND), an innovative financing model to propel Nigeria’s energy transition, which acquired $2bn in Foreign Direct Investment into the country. He is a well-known figure in Nigeria and in the Nigerian energy industry at large.

While an editor claims that the Centre for Energy Investment and Innovation (an organization the subject leads) lacks notability, this does/should not diminish the subject's recognition/notability. Reputable sources such as Vanguard, Premium Times, and This Day have consecutively reported about the subject. See [17] and [18] [19] [20].

The article may require improvement and minor edits, but this should not serve as a ground for deletion. Instead, it should be seen as an opportunity to expand the article and provide more context, keeping in mind that a lack of citations should not automatically lead to deletion unless it severely impacts the article's verifiability. Gonisulaimann (talk) 21:20, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment- Being associated with notable individuals or organizations does not automatically make a subject notable. Most of the sources, if not all, do not explicitly discuss the topic, although they are reliable. However, they are not independent, and the article fails to meet both the General Notability Guideline WP:GNG and the Subject Specific Notability Guideline WP:SNG.Royalesignature (talk). 05:40, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment- Thanks for providing all these references but kindly note that most of the provided references are dependent of the subject and mostly of subject opinion. Royalesignature (talk). 05:50, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Weinberg

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

This article does not have significant coverage for his acting career and does it fail synthesis material. Absolutiva (talk) 10:35, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and California. Shellwood (talk) 11:11, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Michigan, and Tennessee. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:53, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Home Alone 4 per nom. The article's history shows it served as a redirect in 2022 before reverted. – The Grid (talk) 14:46, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect redux. Bearian (talk) 03:52, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alan White (DJ)

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

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

Advertorialized WP:BLP of a radio DJ and a spinoff article about his purported "television show" that may or may not ever have actually existed, with neither article properly referenced as having any strong claim to passing inclusion criteria for media personalities or their shows.
As always, broadcasters are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to show evidence of WP:GNG-worthy third party coverage and analysis about them to establish that they've been externally validated as significant by somebody other than their own public relations agent -- but the BLP is "referenced" to one deadlinked unreliable source, one discogs.com directory entry about somebody else who isn't Alan White and one glancing namecheck of Alan White's existence in a newspaper obituary of somebody else who also isn't Alan White, absolutely none of which constitutes support for the notability of Alan White.
And meanwhile, the "television show" article is actually serving primarily as a coatrack for a largely reduplicated summary of the BLP, and not actually saying even one word at all about a "television show" until the very end, when it finally reveals that the "television show" that's posing as the article's nominal subject is "currently in pre-production" -- except it's said that since the day the article was created in 2011, and the article has never been updated since then with any evidence that the show ever actually started airing. And it's also based entirely on unreliable sources that aren't support for notability, with absolutely no GNG-worthy coverage about either Alan White or the "show" present there either.
Nothing stated in either article is "inherently" notable without GNG-worthy sourcing for it. Bearcat (talk) 05:08, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Radio, Television, and United States of America. Bearcat (talk) 05:08, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I'm getting a headache on this one trying to locate sources. Too many people named "Alan White", and several active in music.4meter4 (talk) 05:24, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Music, Connecticut, Georgia (U.S. state), Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, and Washington, D.C.. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:46, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lisa Winning

AfDs for this article:

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

Newly recreated promotional bio of an Australian businesswoman; fails WP:GNG, WP:NBIO. I can't see the version deleted last year so don't know if it's sufficiently identical to warrant a speedy deletion, but the sources in this one do not support notability. They are WP:PRIMARYSOURCE interviews ([21], [22], [23], [24]), WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS of Winning that do not constitute WP:SIGCOV of her ([25], [26], [27], [28], [29]), or WP:USERGENERATED sources ([30], [31]). I checked to see whether her book He Texted would qualify her under WP:NCREATIVE, but the only reviews I found were on user-generated sites and thus there's no pass there. The one source that might fit the bill is in a vaguely promotional platform and written by a non-staff contributor who is not a journalist. Nothing found in WP:BEFORE search that works. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:54, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, and Australia. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:54, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and WP:SALT. Like last time, purely promotional. Subject not notable, company not notable, and award not notable. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 00:27, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt as nom's analysis shows, sources are not reliable or sufficiently indepth to meet WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 02:36, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Checked deleted version, not eligible for WP:CSD#G4. Also, not convinced salting is called for here.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 15:11, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adam Graham (businessman)

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

Non-notable businessman. Sources are primary and/or non-independent, and none of the sources offers significant coverage, so WP:BASIC is not met. bonadea contributions talk 21:03, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and United Kingdom. bonadea contributions talk 21:03, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I researched this case and I believe that Mr. Graham meets the notability criteria outlined in Wikipedia's guidelines, particularly the General Notability Guideline (GNG), as he has received significant coverage in multiple reliable, independent secondary sources.

Significant Coverage in Reliable Sources:

"Getting Locked Out Inspired Me to Start New App" Publication: [BBC] This article discusses how Mr. Graham's personal experience led to the creation of the JustFix app, showcasing his innovation in addressing common household issues.
"How Startup Founders Are Trying to Rewrite the Investment Rules" Publication: [Forbes] This piece features Mr. Graham among other entrepreneurs who are pioneering new investment strategies in the startup ecosystem.
"Top Strategies for Startup Leadership Success" Publication: [CXO] An exploration of effective leadership strategies where Mr. Graham's approaches and insights are highlighted.
"The Comfort of Control: Unpacking the Success of On-Demand Services" Publication: [The Independent] An analysis of on-demand services featuring Mr. Graham's contributions through JustFix.
"Valiant CEO: Top 20 Businesses to Watch in 2024" Publication: [Valiant CEO] JustFix, founded by Mr. Graham, is listed among the top businesses to watch, indicating significant industry impact.
"Three Startup Success Tips from JustFix Founder Adam Graham" Publication: [Economic Insider] Mr. Graham offers advice to aspiring entrepreneurs, indicating his role as a thought leader.
"Revolutionizing Investment Strategies: Startup Founders Leading the Way" Publication: [Funderlyst] Features Mr. Graham's innovative approaches to investment and business growth.
"JustFix: Nationwide Launch of the App Redefining Home Maintenance with Speed and Convenience" Publication: [Yahoo Finance] The national launch of JustFix, highlighting how Mr. Graham's app is redefining home maintenance with a focus on speed and convenience.
"New Business to Deliver Fastest Fixes in Urgent Home Repairs Market" Publication: [ABC MONEY] Discusses how JustFix, under Mr. Graham's leadership, is positioned to provide the quickest solutions in the urgent home repairs market.

Media Appearances:

Television: "Adam Graham: Redefining Home Maintenance with JustFix" A TV segment where Mr. Graham discusses the impact of JustFix on the home maintenance industry.
Podcast: "MoFounders Podcast: How to Disrupt an Outmoded Industry and Scale an App Nationwide" Mr. Graham shares insights on industry disruption and scaling a tech startup.

The above sources are independent, reliable, and provide significant coverage of Mr. Graham's work and contributions to the industry. They demonstrate his notability as an entrepreneur and justify the retention of his Wikipedia page.

If we were to delete his page based on the current criteria, it would necessitate the deletion of numerous other pages of individuals with even less coverage or impact. Therefore, rather than removing the page, it would be more appropriate to update it with additional information and the sources provided above to improve its completeness and align it with Wikipedia's standards.

----

Stelios2121 (talk) 12:33, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Let's take a look at those sources. Sources 1 and 2 in your list are already in the draft. I appreciate that source evaluation is tricky and that you have had a very long break from Wikipedia editing, so I'll to go into a bit of detail regarding all the sources you suggest. The table got rather large – click "show" to see it.

Source	Significant?	Independent?	Reliable?	Secondary?	Pass/Fail	Notes
1	N	Y	Y	N	N	A brief piece based almost entirely on quotes from Graham, which "showcases" nothing and (more to the point) does not show notability.
2	N	N	N	N	N	Based entirely on an interview. Regarding reliability, see WP:FORBESCON.
3	?	N	?	N	N	No named author, interview on a website which to all appearences offers a marketing platform for businesspeople.
4	N	N	N	N	N	Graham is not the main focus of this article. In addition, it is clearly labelled as advertising, see this info.
5	N	Y	?	Y	N	A short review of the JustFix app, in a list of 20 reviews of different products, which only mentions Graham in passing.
6	N	N	N	N	N	Clearly labelled as "branded content", and based entirely on quotes from Graham.
7	N	N	N	N	N	This is just a shortened version of the Forbes contributor piece, no 2 in this list.
8	N	N	?	N	N	Press release. May or may not be considered a reliable source, but is useless for all purposes except to show that the application JustFix exists.
9	N	N	?	?	N	Press release or similar, as its byline is "ABC Staff" rather than a named writer. I am not familiar with the website abcmoney.co.uk but I see that they welcome contributions in the form of "guest posts" or advertorials, and the tone of this article is clearly promotional rather than informational.
Total qualifying sources					0	There must be multiple qualifying sources to meet the notability requirements

The TV segment has the label "By: Impact Team (Sponsored Content)" so it is not independent, reliable, or secondary, and the podcast is him talking so also not secondary. --bonadea contributions talk 15:37, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To summarise, only two your suggested sources are independent, none provides significant coverage, and most are not reliable. That there may be other articles about non-notable people isn't a factor when we discuss whether this person is notable or not. --bonadea contributions talk 15:50, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lee J. Slavutin

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

Created by a single purpose editor so possible promotion or autobio. A search for sources in google news and google books yielded nothing in depth. Mainly 1 line mentions in google books, this source "The Sid Kess Approach - Page 82" seems the only decent one. But fails WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 00:20, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Medicine, Australia, and New York. LibStar (talk) 00:20, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Has about three papers that come up in Gscholar, not much of anything else really, mentioned here [32]. Doesn't seem to have made much notability for our purposes here. Oaktree b (talk) 02:49, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:27, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Support nomination rationale. Mekomo (talk) 11:25, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Donevan Chew

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

Pretty obvious promotional article with sentences that could only be written by the article subject or someone they paid to write about them "more importantly, is the owner of four pika Chews (three sons, one daughter)". The only reference is an 3-sentence official blurb, probably also publicist-written. He won a Clio Award, but I am skeptical of that being a real claim of notability. It looks like there were 1,215 Clio Awards given in that year alone. Here2rewrite (talk)

Delete: Seems to be a marketing exec, so sourcing I find is all PR-ish items [33]. Not sure what a pika is, his children? Regardless, delete for a lack of sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 16:06, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Malaysia. Shellwood (talk) 16:12, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:TNT and WP:GNG. It’s difficult to take this seriously when the lead talks about his hair. No reliable sources, no article. Bearian (talk) 06:10, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Summers Vitus Nwokie

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

Contested draftification without improvements, so here we are. Fails WP:NBIO. Geschichte (talk) 12:34, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Nigeria. CptViraj (talk) 13:15, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Concerns of undisclosed paid editing aside (see: File:Summers Vitus Nwokie.jpg), there are no sources to establish the general notability criteria. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 15:03, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:ANYBIO or WP:GNG. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:41, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Subject fails WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO. Versace1608 ^{Wanna Talk?} 16:50, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the other two sources being fluff, a single reliable source in a local newspaper isn’t enough for notability. Bearian (talk) 06:28, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This doesn't meet GNG. I tried searching online for some sources, nothing reliable. Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 17:19, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Joline Godfrey

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

Lack of notability Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 00:34, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, Maine, and Massachusetts. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:10, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
weak keep: The one book review given is fine, there's also a brief review here [34]. Should be able to pass AUTHOR. Oaktree b (talk) 16:15, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's discussed here also, briefly [35]. Oaktree b (talk) 16:19, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as passes WP:AUTHOR. I added a couple of additional reviews. Could use a bit of clean up and there are more sources out there. Nnev66 (talk) 22:06, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Darius J. Pearce

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

Doesn't appear to meet WP:BASIC. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:38, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Politics, Business, and Jersey. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:38, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You should note that this is not the first time deletion of this article has been debated, I would ask you to explain what has changed since the last debate took place which would mean that the decision to retain the article, should now be re-considered?

He definitely falls within the general notability guideline in terms of Jersey. Darius J. Pearce is one of the most influential political figures in the island. As you may be able to tell he evokes strong feelings both for and against. However, even from within prison walls (he is not due for release until December 2025 at the earliest) he has still managed to hit the headlines every year since incarcerated (most of which have not been included within the article). Let's face it two people have been arguing for weeks over what should go in the article or not; that in itself dictates that he has some level of notability.

Whilst it is not unreasonable to argue that no Jersey politician meets the criteria required for WP:BASIC. That would seem to be very unfair to small jurisdictions; likewise no politician of the Pitcairn Islands or of the Faroe islands should be represented as they are not particularly newsworthy outside their jurisdiction. Admittedly a number of the stories which the original article refers to have since disappeared from the web, however, I have reviewed the article and there are a substantial number of stories from other Jersey news sources which have not been referred to.

There is a danger in people from large jurisdictions not allowing small jurisdictions to be properly represented, I would say if you delete this article then at least 90% of Jersey articles should also be deleted. RichardColgate (talk) 23:16, 17 November 2024 (UTC) — RichardColgate (talk · contribs) is a confirmed sock puppet of DariusJersey (talk · contribs). [reply]
RichardColgate, if he is one of the most influential political figures in the island, it should be no trouble finding sources stating as such. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:02, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My only concern was/is to prevent defamation from taking place... deletion achieves that - so I am ambivalent on the deletion generally, but wished to raise the issue of ensuring that small jurisdictions. Trust me - no one from Jersey is of any particular importance outside Jersey other than Henry Cavill of course. So I am sure Curb Safe Charmer and I will agree that it is better if local people decide who is locally notable.

The article was very old and a lot of the links upon which it was based no longer function, that does not mean that they never did. Wikipedia does not require that the facts are verifiable ONLY from internet links.

You have decided you want to edit this article so you could do the research I suggest that you look up the human rights case in the Court of Appeal of Jersey, which he won as a litigant in person. The first person ever. Extremely notable within our community. Just go through all the judgements that you removed from the article and you will see why he is notable... he is not a lawyer, he represents himself and he wins. A non-lawyer mentioned in the Letter to the Editor in the Jersey Law Review by Stephanie Nicolle QC (not being from Jersey you will not understand the importance of Stephanie Nicolle but she is THE authority on law in Jersey, she never gets anything wrong).

I am not here to prove anything to you, BUT... should you wish to delete the article then so be it, there is nothing stopping me from re-posting once I have had the time and inclination to do the research and write the article. RichardColgate (talk) 16:30, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:NPOL, WP:BASIC, and WP:GNG. Also delete per WP:NOTPROMO as the article is clearly full of puffery and lack encyclopedic WP:TONE. As far as I can tell no serious discussion of notability has taken place anywhere. This is the first AFD, and Talk:Darius J. Pearce has a very nominal wave at a notability discussion without actually engaging with WP:N policy in a meaningful way. The article is currently mainly cited to WP:PRIMARY sources, and those that are not independent or only mention the subject in passing. None of the sources meet the requirements at WP:SIGCOV.4meter4 (talk) 00:17, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep~~ - meets WP:GNG - see Google News, but needs to be TNTed due to COI, neutrality and undue weight. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 10:25, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Curb Safe Charmer, WP:BASIC requires significant coverage from sources that are intellectually independent of each other. The Google News link only shows coverage in one local newspaper. Are there any other sources which provide significant coverage? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:12, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  A quick search found [36], [37], [38], [39]. Note Bailiwick Express was independent of the Jersey Evening Post at the time, but the companies have since merged. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 12:35, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  So it appears that if he is notable, it is because of his criminal activities, in which case WP:CRIMINAL comes into play. I do not believe either of the criteria apply. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:02, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Fails WP:CRIMINAL. And WP:SIGCOV is still not met.4meter4 (talk) 20:25, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's convinced me. Struck my keep !vote and changed to delete. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 22:41, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I chopped out all the material that not verifiable per WP:BURDEN/ WP:Verifiability; removed criminal content cited only to primary sources which is a no-no under WP:BLPCRIMINAL and WP:Attack page; and removed all original synthesis and analysis on primary sources per WP:No original research. There's hardly anything left now in the article, because there is no secondary coverage of this man except for his criminal activities above. But adding that in now would be against multiple policies; including WP:CRIMINAL, WP:BLPCRIMINAL, and WP:Attack page. There's no way we can have an article on this man.4meter4 (talk) 21:03, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete* I have been persuaded to change from being ambivfalent to being in favour of deleting this article as it stands. I have neither the time nor the inclination to re-write the article now. I will simply re-add if and when I get the urge to write the article to the appropriate standard. Thanks to all for their assistance in bringing the defamation to an end of one of the most renowned and notable anti-establishment Jersey politicians. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RichardColgate (talk • contribs) 21:33, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I am the original author of the article, although it has changed significantly since I wrote the stub back in 2006. I concur that nearly all the articles which have been the source of much of the development of this page have now gone dead for one reason or another but the article is nearly 20 years old.

No doubt he falls within the general notability guideline. I have found 62 separate news stories on Bailiwick Express related to Darius Pearce since 2014 (when that paper started). Here is one story from JEP which makes him recently very notable locally - ^[1], there are multiple articles in the Jersey Evening Post archive. There are many pages worth of his Court cases on the Jersey Law website (see the 10:41, 13 November 2024 version of the page). How much coverage is significant coverage? He is most notable to me personally as the only other Darius who lives in Jersey, however that is beside the point. The trouble is that most articles about him are 'tabloid' articles. If you read this article you would know that this goes back to the time he embarrassed the JEP by pointing out they were aggrandising the Chief Minister by cropping photos in a misleading way. He has been newsworthy even whilst languishing in a prison cell (under Jersey's laws he can be released no earlier than after five years, so that will be December 2025). I would concur with Richard Colgate's comments about small jurisdictions, it is important that we are represented equally with larger jurisdictions. If you were to ask anyone in Jersey who are the 100 most notable political figures then Darius would definitely make it in and for the 50 most notable, when it came to the top 20 I think that would be pushing it. How notable is notable within a small jurisdiction? You seem to want to exclude him simply for not being ruthless enough a self-promoter.^[2]

KEEPI would look at it from the perspective of whether or not Jersey as a whole would be better represented with this page included or without, on that basis it is a

That said how we would reach a stage where the article was acceptable is another question. Much of the background information you have removed is available on Darius' blog and/or 'the Friends of Darius Pearce' (the group raising funds for his ongoing appeals) blog, sources do not need to be neutral per wiki requirements, I suspect that is the source of Richard Colgate's version of the article. see ^[3] ^[4]— Preceding unsigned comment added by DariusJersey (talk • contribs) — DariusJersey (talk • contribs) is blocked for having used sockpuppets in this debate.

References

^ "'No doubt' money-launderer handcuffed at father's funeral had rights breached". Jersey Evening Post. Jersey Evening Post. Retrieved 18 November 2024.
^ "How to donate". Friends of Darius Pearce. Retrieved 18 November 2024.
^ "About Darius". Through Deserts Blog. Friends of Darius Pearce. Retrieved 18 November 2024.
^ "Darius Pearce Jersey electoral history". Flow.je. Retrieved 18 November 2024.

Note. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#DariusJersey and RichardColgate.4meter4 (talk) 23:18, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Update. Both DariusJersey and RichardColgate have been blocked for abusive editing after a usercheck confirmed they are WP:SOCKS.4meter4 (talk) 16:42, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - He doesn't meet the criteria for notability as a crime perpetrator. The only significant coverage of him is routine local coverage that focuses on his legal issues and refers to him as a jeweller. There's nothing to indicate he's notable as a politician either. Ynsfial (talk) 03:41, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - we routinely delete the articles of failed parliamentary candidates. We also don’t owe an article to anyone or any place. Bearian (talk) 06:08, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No indication of significance, essentially a man in the street, or the Clapham omnibus if you know the reference. Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:BIO. No indication of NPOL so I'm not mentioning it. scope_creep^Talk 10:48, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Corm II

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

An article was draftified to Draft:Charles Corm II in May 2024 because of lack of notability, but was recreated as a mainspace article by the author in August. It still lacks any evidence of notability of the subject, Charles Corm II. The cited information is almost entirely about his company, CormCo. Time for permanent deletion, in my view. Sionk (talk) 17:18, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Finance, and Lebanon. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:39, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly contest the deletion of this article on Charles Corm II. I have been covering Lebanese people and people of Lebanese descent for decades. Dozens of totally non-notable personalities, including a slew of politicians and their children, have been included in Wikipedia with absolutely no respect for high-quality evidence, policies. and guidelines. Corm II is a notable person in Lebanon, beyond Lebanon, and in the global investment community. He built a $1 billion investment company and has financially backed several notable tech startups, which are now listed in Wikipedia too. He invests through CORMCO, the company he founded to that effect, and hence a large part of the article's focus is on CORMCO as it is the investment vehicle used to carry out these successful investments. Corm II is an investor and therefore does not get, or seek to get, the kind of media coverage Wikipedia usually craves to get. Failing to understand the above is failing to correctly assess the notability of this article. He is more than worthy of being in Wikipedia and I will defend this article as much as needed in what seems to be systemic bias against more discreet personalities and in favor of sensationalist articles about heavily covered nobodies. Kind regards. Caliban31 (talk) 18:38, 16 November 2024 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Caliban31 (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD. [reply]
~~:Agreed. Khalifa2024 (talk) 19:43, 16 November 2024 (UTC)~~WP:SOCKSTRIKE Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:23, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and WP:SALT to prevent recreation. Article is sourced to puff pieces that lack clear independence. Fails WP:SIGCOV.4meter4 (talk) 19:16, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Puff pieces? These are investing books. Caliban31 (talk) 19:35, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~:Strongly disagree with your statement. Khalifa2024 (talk) 19:45, 16 November 2024 (UTC)~~WP:SOCKSTRIKE Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:24, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The subject is notable and the article provides high-quality evidence. Additional references should be added. I also do not support the WP:SALT whatever the final decision. Khalifa2024 (talk) 19:43, 16 November 2024 (UTC)— Khalifa2024 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. sockstrike Girth Summit _(blether) 11:55, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - obviously fails WP:GNG due to lack of significant coverage. A lot of this article is cited to Investopedia and CORMCO neither of which even discuss Corm II, so this article potentially fails WP:V as well. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:06, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep.

Spiderone, please hear me out:

I am not Corm II nor do I know him personally. I promise. I'm a fan of his late grandfather like many Lebanese people and people of Lebanese descent. I heard a lot about Corm II and decided to devote an article to him. Nobody paid me or asked me anything. It was supposed to be the first of a number of articles I plan to author and submit for submission. Yes, I spent a lot of time on it as a way of improving my Wikipedia skills. As simple as that. Also, I have made many small edits in many articles on people, places, and events and I'm surprised you don't see them (I don't even know where this stuff appears).
I agree that the article needs further verifications. I thank you for having taken the time to add your notes and I take good notice of them. If you give me some time, I promise to provide the references you rightfully ask for. Until then, please do not allow the deletion of an article that, once improved, deserves its place in Wikipedia. Corm II should not be penalized for my hastiness in drafting the article.
I, of course, retract my statements. It was my way of stating the famous ''never assume...". I do however believe that people like me, proud Arab Americans, have ''no voice'' on Wikipedia and that pains me.
I commend you for the amazing contributions you have made right here on Wikipedia. I skimmed your page and a few of the articles you authored, and it's truly outstanding work. I admit being an amateur in light of your impressive track record here and only wish to lean more about editing and authoring articles.
Be kind Spiderman, it's a small world. I wish you all the best.

Truly, Caliban31

Caliban31 (talk) 19:10, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How do you know the name of his spouse, names of his children, which schools he attended and his DOB? None of this is in the cited sources. It's important to follow the policy of WP:NOR. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:08, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I find sources relating to his grandfather (same name) but none for him. As has been noted in the article, many sources fail verification. The first source appears to have nothing to do with the content of this article. It's a republished technical report from 1991 (full text at Openlibrary), which predates this fellow's entry into business and thus cannot verify the statements here. Without more reliable sourcing this can't be kept. It does not instill confidence that sources that are obviously irrelevant to the subject have been included. I will cycle back to see if sourcing has been improved. Lamona (talk) 05:33, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, fails WP:BASIC/WP:GNG, in fact, at present no citation even mentions subject, see source assessment table below, and I would be surprised if Kwatinetz (2004) and Huisman (2001), to which no pages have been given in the citations, mention him.
The currently first listed reference:
Ginsberg, Ari (n.d.). Investing in New Information Technology: The Role of Competitive Posture and Issue Diagnosis (Classic Reprint). FB&C Limited. ISBN 978-0-243-07486-0.
with no date and with erroneous ISB-number is an audacious WP:FAKE reference. The original citation is
Ginsberg, Ari; Venkatraman, N. (1992). "Investing in New Information Technology: The Role of Competitive Posture and Issue Diagnosis". Strategic Management Journal. 13. Wiley: 37–53. ISSN 0143-2095. JSTOR 2486351. Retrieved November 18, 2024.,
but notice that the paper was first presented at the Minnesota Strategy Process Conference, October 20-22, 1991 at a time when Corm was 17 and still in high school. And it does, of course, not mention Corm at all.

**Source assessment table:**
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Ginsberg, Ari. Investing in New Information Technology: The Role of Competitive Posture and Issue Diagnosis (Classic Reprint). FB&C Limited. ISBN 978-0-243-07486-0.	Assumed	Assumed	Citation is disingenuous. The original article is Ginsberg, Ari; Venkatraman, N. (1992). "Investing in New Information Technology: The Role of Competitive Posture and Issue Diagnosis". Strategic Management Journal. 13. Wiley: 37–53. ISSN 0143-2095. JSTOR 2486351. Retrieved November 18, 2024. Subject was still in high school by the time this article was published.	✘ No
Bushnell, Mitch. "CORMCO – About". New York City: CORMCO.	Subject's company web page.	? Subject's company web page.	Subject not mentioned	✘ No
"S&P 500 Average Return and Historical Performance". Investopedia.		Citation is to Investopedia, a tertiary source on finances, owned by Dotdash. A number of users have reported inaccurate and low-quality content on this website. It is advised not to use Investopedia, and to cite other, higher-quality sources instead.	Subject not mentioned	✘ No
Salameh, Franck (2015). Charles Corm: An Intellectual Biography of a Twentieth-Century Lebanese "Young Phoenician". The Levant and Near East: A Multidisciplinary Book Series. Lexington Books. ISBN 978-0-7391-8401-1. Retrieved November 18, 2024.	?	Assumed, Salameh is Professor of Near Eastern Studies at Boston College.	? Book about subject's grandfather. Page missing, source not available.	? Unknown
Kwatinetz, Mike; Wood, Danielle Kwatinetz (March 15, 2004). The Big Tech Score: A Top Wall Street Analyst Reveals Ten Secrets to Investing Success. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 978-0-471-43665-2.	Assumed	Assumed	? Page missing, source not available.	? Unknown
Huisman, Kuno J. M. (November 30, 2001). Technology Investment. Boston, Mass.: Springer Science & Business Media. ISBN 978-0-7923-7487-9.	Assumed	Assumed	? Page missing, source not available.	? Unknown
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Sam Sailor 15:25, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~. For the last time and as I mentioned above, I do not know Corm II personally. In the real world and among real people who don't spend their time online, that means that we have never met. I obviously got in touch with him through email (we are connected on LinkedIn) for this article. He gave me personal info as well as some personal media he had in his possession. That's it. Full stop. I will consider further action if and when the vandalism and harassment against me continues. There is no justification for such behaviors against a newcomer to Wikipedia only wanting to contribute to the community but discriminated against because of that person's ethnicity and religion.

Vandalism: On multiple occasions, my contributions to various articles have been deliberately altered or removed without justification. This includes edits or articles which were reverted or modified in a manner that distorts the original intent and factual accuracy of the content. According to Wikipedia's policy, vandalism is defined as editing intended to obstruct or defeat the project's purpose. The actions taken against my edits clearly fall under this definition.

Harassment: Additionally, I have been subjected to repeated personal attacks and targeted harassment by certain users. This behavior includes specific instances of harassment, such as derogatory comments on my user talk page or edit summaries, which appear to be aimed at intimidating me and discouraging my participation. Wikipedia defines harassment as a pattern of repeated offensive behavior targeting specific individuals. The actions I have faced align with this description.

Best regards.

Caliban31 (talk) 05:11, 19 November 2024 (UTC) — Duplicate !vote: Caliban31 (talk • contribs) has already cast a !vote above.[reply]

CU Note I have just blocked Caliban31 and Khalifa2024, who are the same person. Striking Khalifa2024's comment above, and removing the second bolded 'keep' !vote added by Caliban31. I have not looked at the article and have no view on the merits of the deletion nomination, but when evaluating this discussion the closer should note that for all the commentary above, so far only the article's author has opined in favour of retention. Girth Summit _(blether) 11:55, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanderwaalforces (talk) 20:50, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - the accusations of discrimination and harassment made by the creator, the only account actually in favour of keeping this article, are completely baseless. Despite several requests to provide sources, this is still a BLP with zero sources. I can't help but think that the false accusations are a deliberate distraction from that fact. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:59, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Source 4 is about his grandfather, not about this person. The rest of the sources are not about this person in detail. I don't find sources about this individual. Appears non-notable. Oaktree b (talk) 00:55, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nicole Abiouness

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

Nominating an article I wrote for deletion. I wrote it in 2012. I do not believe that this subject qualifies for inclusion in Wikipedia due to WP:Notability. Missvain (talk) 22:20, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, Wine, California, and Virginia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:43, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kaizenify (talk) 13:55, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sandeep Johri

AfDs for this article:

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

References do not demonstrate significant coverage by multiple sources. Brandon (talk) 07:01, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Technology. Brandon (talk) 07:01, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Maharashtra, California, and Michigan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 12:08, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kaizenify (talk) 06:09, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Barak Rosen

AfDs for this article:

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

Fluff piece about non-notable businessperson. Cannot find any significant coverage of the article's subject, completely failing GNG. All sources in the article are about his company's acquisitions or incidental inclusion in lists of businesspeople. Dan Leonard (talk • contribs) 03:53, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Israel. Dan Leonard (talk • contribs) 03:53, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi user:Dan Leonard,

I have three big profile articles about Barak in Hebrew. Since he is Israeli, can I add them to the article? And will it suffice?

כבר לא שני מתווכים מרעננה: "הם רוצים להיות השחקנים הכי גדולים, רוזן מוכן להתאבד על עסקות" (דה מרקר)

https://www.themarker.com/realestate/2021-11-05/ty-article-magazine/.highlight/0000017f-e3c4-d9aa-afff-fbdcdc580000

הילדים הרעים של שוק הנדל"ן הכפילו את שוויים ב־2016 (כלכליסט)

https://www.calcalist.co.il/markets/articles/0,7340,L-3706754,00.html

הכל בכל מקום בבת אחת (כלכליסט)

https://newmedia.calcalist.co.il/magazine-12-05-22/m01.html

עידו כ.ש. (talk) 05:44, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If the sources pass WP:SIGCOV then they might be acceptable; however, it's worth noting that an article on Rosen has been repeatedly deleted on the Hebrew Wikipedia and is now salted. Dan Leonard (talk • contribs) 19:44, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe they do comply. And I’m aware that the Hebrew article was deleted before, but it was done years before most of the coverage about him was published, he also gained more reputation since. Moreover the articles were written very poorly, I believe that if they’ve written them properly that article would stay up. Many businessmen with much smaller significance have articles about them in addition to their company, so the only reason I can imagine Rosen’s article caught attention was the writing’s quality. I might invest in a more appropriate Hebrew article for him soon. עידו כ.ש. (talk) 15:18, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, we really need to have a neutral review of sources brought to the discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:09, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. It's hard to judge on these foreign language sources because some of them are behind paywalls. The ones I can see look like they do. I'm inclined to just WP:AGF the foreign language sources behind pay walls and trust that they are accurately reported as containing WP:SIGCOV.4meter4 (talk) 05:14, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:AGF doesn't apply to " I'm inclined to just WP:AGF the foreign language sources behind pay walls". LibStar (talk) 06:18, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There was a topic of Barak Rosen in Hebrew Wikipedia and this topic was deleted because there was no encyclopedic value. IdanST (talk) 10:53, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:TNT. Oy veh, what a wall of messy spam and weasel words. Almost none of the sources are reliable - even if there’s coverage. Bearian (talk) 04:23, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen CuUnjieng

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

This was a pending "draft" in articlespace. The sources in the article are of low-quality, and the WP:BEFORE search was questionable at best. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 08:19, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Finance, and Philippines. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 08:19, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Passes WP:BIO and WP:GNG. However, it is recommended to enhance the content by incorporating additional reliable sources, which are available online and can be appropriately cited to improve the article.--— MimsMENTOR ^talk 08:41, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The reason why I wanted to draftify is that I couldn't find any reliable sources, and unfortunately, in my experience, without draftification, the article gets abandoned. The draft might get abandoned as well, but can be G13-deleted (basically, a "soft delete" where someone can get the draft "refunded" or bought back). I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 17:34, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which sources? Geschichte (talk) 10:19, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 08:54, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete The articles a whole NOTCV mess, but as of the 7th of this month, he hosts a TV show on Philippine TV (ABS/CBN). It's arguably WP:TOOSOON and also arguable that one weekly business show anchoring gig is not the stuff of notability. Borderline, but I'm still not sure there's enough here to keep. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 10:33, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 21:50, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete per Alexandermcnabb above. The only secondary coverage I can find is routine coverage of him doing his job. The new weekly talk show is a limited series according to this announcement, and might well vanish after a few weeks, so I agree about that being WP:TOOSOON. The awards and recognition section is too vaguely worded to find any reliable sources to verify. Wikishovel (talk) 11:22, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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. Star Mississippi 20:51, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jeff Radwell

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

Fails WP:GNG. Most of the sources are about his company, Canouflet, with few pass mentioned in some journals. Ibjaja055 (talk) 03:23, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Technology, China, Hong Kong, England, California, New York, and Pennsylvania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:39, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi lbjaja055,

Thank you for your careful review and dedication to Wikipedia’s standards. I do want to acknowledge this is my first attempt at creating a biography for a living person, so I may not be fully versed in all nuances of the guidelines. However, I’m committed to refining the page to meet the standards set by WP and would welcome any guidance on improvements. I do respectfully disagree with the proposed deletion and would like to clarify the sources used and their relevance.

The assertion that “most of the sources are about his company” is not entirely accurate. While there are a few references to his company, Camouflet, they represent a minority of the sources and were included primarily because they are recent publications. The majority of references come from reputable scientific journals and independent media outlets that focus on his personal contributions to the field, particularly his pioneering research during the COVID-19 pandemic.

These sources highlight his impactful discoveries and advancements, which have had a verifiable influence on public health and scientific understanding during a critical time. His work meets the notability criteria outlined in WP

through these reliable, independent publications, which underscore his standing in the scientific community and the lasting significance of his contributions.

I hope this clarification provides a fuller picture of the subject’s notability, independent of his company, and trust it will support reconsideration of the deletion proposal. Thank you again for your commitment to maintaining Wikipedia's high standards. Stichodactyla (talk) 19:05, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments: 3 of the sources cited (3, 6, and 10) are basically press releases. Some of the others are either primary sources or more directly about the company, with only a passing mention of him. Bearian (talk) 03:53, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Bearian,

Thank you for your review and for bringing up these concerns. I've removed the majority of sources that seemed like press releases. There are, however, additional independent, reliable sources. I'm committed to editing, including re-evaluating cited sources and removing or reworking content that may appear overly promotional. Stichodactyla (talk) 02:06, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:18, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The references appear to be about topics separate from the subject, as stated above. I was unable to find additional references. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 15:09, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:05, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NOTINHERITED. AI in medicine is the next big thing. But I can’t see how or why he’s notable. We need much more about him. Bearian (talk) 04:30, 23 November 2024 (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.

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. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 23:12, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Milo Runkle

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

Research shows Milo helped launch a fund called Joyful Ventures to invest in food sustainable companies and co-founded non-profit Mercy for Animals. The mainstream news coverage where his name appears are about the fund launch (and then very little else), and he is only mentioned as one of the cofounders, and there doesn’t seem to be mainstream coverage of Mercy for Animals in connection with him (or in general really). Not clear he has enough mainstream coverage to hit the notability bar. Jenny8lee (talk) 22:14, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Jenny8lee (talk) 22:14, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
would a Move to Joyful Ventures be a possibility worth considering? I see some references, some are WP:ROUTINE or passing mentions. [40] Andre🚐 22:47, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:16, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:12, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to The Good Food Institute per WP:ATD. As the co-founder of that non-profit that is probably the best outcome rather than deletion. Otherwise fails WP:GNG/WP:BASIC.4meter4 (talk) 02:42, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'd redirect to The Good Food Institute but the subject isn't mentioned at that target article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:29, 17 November 2024 (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.

Pranav Adani

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

Non-notable individual. Sources are promotional and cited to WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Only known for being a relative of Gautam Adani. See WP:INHERITED. Ratnahastin (talk) 09:54, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and India. Shellwood (talk) 10:10, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Gujarat and Massachusetts. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:21, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - as noted above, infomercials have taken over previously responsible media there, so sourcing about business in India requires better quality sourcing. Bearian (talk) 08:54, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: per WP:BEFORE, subject passes WP:BASIC. And this article has persisted since 2018. AFD Nomination seems intentional or any paid agenda. B-Factor (talk) 13:52, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:BASIC states- "People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." — So far not a single source has been provided that offers significant coverage to the subject and doesn't fall under WP:NEWSORGINDIA, which raises concerns as to whether the supposed coverage is even independent. Articles are not considered notable only because they have existed for some time on Wikipedia. Your last sentence is a serious aspersion without any basis. - Ratnahastin (talk) 06:08, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:41, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:INHERITED. Nothing shows he is notable outside his relationship with Gautam Adani. Lorstaking (talk) 04:11, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The subject holds multiple notable positions in notable organizations, and the sources are reliable enough. Citations can be implemented.Lalu Faizy (talk) 19:06, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Holding positions in notable organisations does not make one notable by association, see WP:INHERITED. - Ratnahastin (talk) 04:02, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources India.com, Business Standard, DD, DNA India, Business Today Fugoja (talk) 20:52, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
These are very poor sources for establishing notability, as all of them are Indian news organisations, which are known to release paid articles without any disclosure, as outlined in WP:NEWSORGINDIA.

Your first source is sourced to india.com which is written in a promotional language. Same thing with the second source, your third source is only a DD footage of his speech at Uttrakhand GIS 2023, your fourth source also appears to be a paid article given the promotional tone, and your fifth source is only a transcript of the speech he made at GIS 2023. - Ratnahastin (talk) 02:36, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:INHERITED. None of the references above establish WP:GNG. Dympies (talk) 05:32, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The article is live since 2018, and the article has maintained a certain level of notability over time. Since it's creation, the article has been developed with reliable sources, and although it may have room for improvement, its longevity demonstrates to met WP:GNG and WP:PEOPLE when it was initially published. Regemoso (talk) 08:04, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Articles that have existed for far longer than this get deleted regularly at AfD, keeping an article only because it has existed for some time has no basis in policy. - Ratnahastin (talk) 08:10, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Do we have a possible WP:ATD here? A redirect to Gautam Adani? Or would that be irrelevant to that article?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 21:41, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Close as No Consensus. I think its time to close this as WP:NOCONSENSUS. The problem with the whole WP:NEWSORGINDIA argument is one is never sure whether the coverage is paid or independent, and it essentially means that anybody living India who draws national but not international news coverage might become the target of such an AFD. To my mind, this kind of reasoning is a shot in the dark because it could be legit, and it might not be. What is certainly does is reinforce WP:SYSTEMICBIAS against article on Indian people which is problematic. With people on both sides of the issue, and with no definite proof that the coverage isn't independent I'm not seeing a strong consensus to delete at this time.4meter4 (talk) 02:02, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:N. There isn't one source that has significantly provided coverage to this person. The sources only give him little importance because they are discussing Gautam Adani. CharlesWain (talk) 03:36, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete undoubtedly fails WP:GNG. Not opposed to creating a redirect. Abhishek0831996 (talk) 04:23, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As relative of a notable Gautam Adani does not make the subject notable. WP:INHERITED. Not opposed to Redirect. RangersRus (talk) 13:08, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
'Weak Keep as per the following three reliable references; South China Morning Post, Financial Express, and Business Standard. If there are more such citations, the page could meet the criteria outlined in the Heymann Standard. However, we should keep in mind that WP:THREE and WP:HEY are essays, not an established guidelines. Charlie (talk) 13:26, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@CharlieMehta: South China Morning Post source is discussing Gautam Adani and only giving short coverage to Pranav Adani based on his familial relationship and the benefits that come with it (positions in his companies). The Business Standard is an Indian news organisation and the source is written in promotional tone, it also says "Pranav Adani, Managing Director, Agro and Oil & Gas, Adani Group" at the very bottom of the page which is very unusual and the Financial Express source only has a generic byline and same promotional tone, therefore both would fall under WP:NEWSORGINDIA as likely sponsored articles. - Ratnahastin (talk) 04:14, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete based on the source analysis provided by Ratnahastin. Charlie (talk) 15:46, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep In terms of notability, the subject passes WP:GNG as there is significant coverage Bloomberg, DNA, India.com. Regarding the concern about promotional sources, Indian media employs such a style to attract readers to drive traffic, which can sometimes come across as promotional. The subject has the potential for improvement rather than deletion. Tedamime (talk) 19:00, 19 November 2024 (UTC) Blocked sock[reply]
Except for Bloomberg report (which concerns Adani's slum rehabilitation program), all three of the sources have been addressed above. If you think Indian media does not engage in undisclosed paid releases, then you should get such a consensus on RSN. - Ratnahastin (talk) 19:12, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete completely fails WP:N. Sources do not discuss his biography. The above hand-waves about notability are dubious. ArvindPalaskar (talk) 11:27, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep:- There is no definitive proof that the coverage is not independent. Unless clear evidence is provided to discredit the sources as unreliable or paid. The article appears to meet WP:BASIC, as it has received significant coverage in multiple sources. Not found any strong consensus for deletion. Avishek Pilot (talk) 19:19, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NEWSORGINDIA is very clear on what to consider when assuming an article to be a sponsored content. "Look at the tone and language of the article, its placement in the publication, use of generic bylines not identifying an individual reporter or reviewer, overlap in language with articles found in other publications and on other websites, and others" Almost all the presented sources have one or all of the aforementioned issues. This is also the first AFD you have participated in, like many of the "keep" votes above, I wonder what's going on.- Ratnahastin (talk) 00:55, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please see WP:AVOIDYOU. Avishek Pilot (talk) 10:53, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note to closer - Adani family is known for its bad history with Wikipedia Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2023-02-20/Disinformation report which involved socking and paid editing spanning a decade, even this article has a shady history. This AFD is also seeing a wave of new users that have never participated in deletion nominations before, coming here to vote "keep". See also Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/B-Factor Please take this into consideration when closing. Thanks. - Ratnahastin (talk) 02:54, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep According to an old saying, for every successful person, there are a number of people who hate them for no reason. The same is true in this case with the Adani family. Without a question, Adani Group is the most famous business group in India and the world. The nominator also nominates this 2nd time: Adani EnterprisesLet's come back to Pranav Adani, He is one of the notable businessman of Adani Family, passes WP:GNG. Having presence on notorious resources passes WP:SIGCOV. Bakhtar40 (talk) 06:26, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Prove how it passes WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV, vague hand waving at policies does not amount to much. - Ratnahastin (talk) 13:52, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Many sources have been posted by users wanting to keep this article, although I have already addressed and analysed them in my replies, I'm still going to post a source analysis in tabular form to make it easier for the closer.

Reference Number	Reference	Comments	Independent	Significant	Reliable	Secondary
1	https://www.india.com/business/meet-man-who-studied-at-harvard-and-boston-works-closely-with-gautam-adani-he-is-adanis-7278041/	Promotional tone and emphasizes his "blood relation" to Gautam Adani, falls under NEWSORGINDIA.	No	Yes	No	Yes
2	https://www.business-standard.com/article/companies/pranav-adani-powering-ahead-114111201488_1.html	Promotional flattering puff piece from 2014 that falls under WP:NEWSORGINDIA.	No	Yes	No	Yes
3	https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMe6BgJCXfM	DD footage of his speech at GIS 2023.	Yes	NA	No	No
4	https://www.dnaindia.com/business/report-meet-pranav-adani-one-of-the-heirs-to-india-s-leading-business-empire-he-is-gautam-adani-s-nephew-3111696	Appears to be a promotional press release like the business standard source above, falls under NEWSORGINDIA.	No	Yes	No	Yes
5	https://www.businesstoday.in/magazine/columns/story/indias-green-journey-why-the-country-must-tone-down-its-reliance-on-thermal-energy-according-to-pranav-adani-418968-2024-02-26	Probably the transcript of his speech at a summit,the source lists Pranav Adani as the author.	No	No	No	No
6	https://www.scmp.com/magazines/style/article/3281554/meet-4-heirs-poised-inherit-gautam-adanis-us213-billion-empire-karan-jeet-pranav-and-sagar-company	A few passages dedicated to him emphasizing his role as the inheritor of Adani's fortune.	Yes	No	Yes	Yes
7	https://www.financialexpress.com/life/lifestyle-meet-pranav-adani-the-lesser-known-nephew-of-gautam-adani-and-brother-of-karan-and-jeet-adani-know-about-his-career-education-and-more-3588785/	Indian outlet & promotional puff piece, has generic byline and falls under NEWSORGINDIA.	No	Yes	No	Yes
8	https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-08-08/adani-group-says-it-can-revamp-dharavi-even-as-it-becomes-political-flash-point	Only the second last paragraph covers him,while the last one is quoting him, the source only appears to state his relationship with regards to Adani group's efforts at slum rehabilitation.	Yes	No	Yes	Yes
9	https://www.rediff.com/money/report/pix-special-meet-the-young-man-behind-the-success-of-adani-group/20141113.htm	Same article as the business standard source above.	No	Yes	No	Yes
10	https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/lucknow/pranav-adani-meets-yogi-adityanath-offers-to-invest-in-food-parks-power-7076516/	WP:ROUTINE coverage about him announcing investments in Uttar Pradesh	Yes	No	No	Yes
11	https://www.livemint.com/Companies/DqJuRxvZs9nLSrDnBnMZ4H/Adani-Enterprises-names-Pranav-Adani-as-additional-director.html	WP:ROUTINE coverage & passing mention about being named as a director of an Adani subsidiary.	Yes	No	Yes	Yes
12	https://navbharattimes.indiatimes.com/business/business-news/gautam-adani-lesser-known-nephew-pranav-adani-adani-enterprises-md-know-everything-about-him/articleshow/113673383.cms	Another puff piece in the same vein as all the previous articles.	No	Yes	No	Yes

- Ratnahastin (talk) 03:47, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As discussed on WP:NEWSORGINDIA, there is no indication of sponsored content, such as supplements, published by these media outlets. Additionally, there is no evidence of Brand Wire, Press Release News, Business Spotlight, Brand Post, or Impact Feature. It remains unclear why the nominator continues to consider the content as paid. Avishek Pilot (talk) 10:54, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I already addressed this. - Ratnahastin (talk) 11:10, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Personal opinions alone may not serve as a valid basis for arguments. The entire summary of the AFD seems to rely on personal thoughts without supporting or verifiable evidence to substantiate the concerns raised. Some comments made during the discussion seem aimed at challenging opposing point. As this is a collaborative discussion, it’s important to consider all perspectives and await the final decision. Avishek Pilot (talk) 11:31, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This does not address what I wrote there. - Ratnahastin (talk) 11:33, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Per source analysis provided by the nominator, the subject appears to have only received coverage in paid advertorials while reliable and independent sources only offer rudimentary coverage, that too for being Adani's nephew. Nxcrypto Message 14:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Many sources are available, and as per WP:BASIC, established WP:GNG. Please see the coverage the rediff.com here, Indian Express here, Livemint here, Navbharat Times here. The arguments on WP:NEWSORGINDIA seem to center around the confusion of whether the content is paid or not. However, as per WP:NEWSORGINDIA, there is no indication of paid coverage, only a writing style often used in Indian media. Historically, Indian media uses a promotional tone to attract readers, this does not necessarily indicate paid coverage. If this standard were applied broadly, no Indian article would remain on Wikipedia, as the common issue would always be a promotional tone without evidence of paid coverage. Deleting an article based on such a premise does not align with WP:PURPOSE. Kevarove (talk) 18:14, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That rediff source is literally the same article & authored by the same guy as the Business Standard article that has been already addressed above. Indian Express & Livemint are merely routine news coverage about him investing in Uttar Pradesh and being named as a director of an Adani subsidiary. Navbharat article is an unreliable promotional puff piece. None of these sources address any of the concerns raised prior or fall out of the purview of WP:NEWSORGINDIA. - Ratnahastin (talk) 02:54, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The source analysis is persuasive, far more so than any of the Keep analyses. Edwardx (talk) 19:07, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep- The source analysis by the nominator appears to be based on personal interpretations, as reflected in comments like 'promotional tone,' 'promotional press release,' 'probably the transcript,' 'Indian outlet,' and 'promotional puff piece.' These points lacking in dependability. Additionally, as WP:NEWSORGINDIA is under question. The subject is a well-known business entity, recognized in India and globally. The analysis by Kevarove Pass WP:SIGCOV. Wyzoqaku (talk) 20:13, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The words I have used are already used at WP:NEWSORGINDIA, there's no personal interpretation here. Your post is only reiterating comments by prior votes. - Ratnahastin (talk) 03:10, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: seems to have enough coverage for WP:GNG. Kevarove have added 4 new refs which are Pass WP:N. The sources has significantly provided coverage to this person. Bojawa (talk) 21:56, 21 November 2024 (UTC) Blocked sock.[reply]
Delete per nominator's source analysis and the absence of policy- or source-based keep !votes. I also disagree with the "no consensus" argument above. The history of socking/UPE here is very concerning. At risk of casting improper aspersions, I will note my lack of surprise at seeing that this AfD has attracted a large number of new or inexperienced editors. Toadspike [Talk] 08:59, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There is no evidence of meeting WP:GNG. ZDX _{(User) |}_(Contact) 12:02, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I said this after the second re-list nearly a week ago, and I still believe its true. There currently is no consensus in this discussion to delete the article. The source analysis by Ratnahastin has not made a significant change in consensus, and opinions remain fairly evenly divided (not that it's a vote). It's time to close this as no consensus.4meter4 (talk) 15:38, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Check the SPI. - Ratnahastin (talk) 15:41, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is concerning, but even absent the discounted commenters, I still don't think there is a clear consensus to delete.4meter4 (talk) 17:01, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Given the CU's comment It seems improbable that half a dozen unrelated good-faith actors would show up to an AfD with a history of UPE while hopping across proxies. I would say Wikipedia:Open_proxies#Checkuser applies here. - We will have to discount everyone listed there. - Ratnahastin (talk) 17:20, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for filing that, Ratnahastin. 4meter4, I disagree. The !votes to keep have been entirely free of sourcing or policy-based arguments. And while I agree with your point about systemic bias to some extent, we won't improve the Indian media landscape with an AfD, and a member of the Adani family is the last person I'd consider oppressed by systemic bias. Toadspike [Talk] 17:08, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

a member of the Adani family is the last person I'd consider oppressed by systemic bias - Infact, they have thoroughly abused Wikipedia for self promotion. - Ratnahastin (talk) 17:23, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, sources listed are not enough to satisfy WP:GNG.Adamantine123 (talk) 15:54, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I appreciate Ratnahastin's source analysis but this isn't fully correct; there are important references that pass SIGCOV. I agree with what 4meter4 said above as well.Bakhtar40 (talk) 16:57, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What are those references? - Ratnahastin (talk) 17:07, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep- I found this [41] and with some of the above mentioned it should pass WP:BASIC , WP:GNG Chikwendummesonma (talk) 17:26, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It has a promotional tone and the prose appears to be AI generated: GPTzero analysis of some random samples taken from it [42] [43] [44] - This means that article is perhaps just a collection of hallucinations, therefore not WP:RS. - Ratnahastin (talk) 02:01, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Normally I would not relist a third time per Wikipedia:Deletion_process#Relisting discussions. However, source analysis changes things, making further discussion appropriate so that maybe this contentious AfD can reach a definitive close without inviting review.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 21:36, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gunnar Norberg

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

Yet another hyperlocal politician in the walled garden created to boost Carmel-by-theSea who fails WP:NPOLITICIAN as mayor of a tiny town, fails WP:BIO and WP:GNG. The article is filled with fluff and neither demonstrates nor verifies notability. Even the NYT reference is a passing mention. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:21, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and California. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:21, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I'm not seeing notability, this is more of a play-by-play of the person's life, career and death. Sources are pretty much is discussed in the nomination. I don't find anything esle. Oaktree b (talk) 18:48, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This is another article on a non-notable mayor of Carmel-by-the-Sea, a town of about 3,000 people. The sourcing is hyper-local or sourced to their own autobiography. The article is part of what some editors have called a "walled garden", the purpose of which was boosterism and WP:PROMO. Fails WP:NPOLITICIAN, WP:GNG and WP:NBUSINESSPERSON. Netherzone (talk) 19:09, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Oaktree b, I don't know if you saw that someone removed a lot of the content and sources before the article was nominated for AfD. I don't know if they were right or wrong to do so, but it is impossible to evaluate the article without this material, and so I think it should be kept in until someone explains why they though the deleted sources were not acceptable even for non-controversial material. I have restored some of it pending the result of this AfD. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:44, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's quite a bit more in the article now, but I'm not sure if it makes this person notable. Being in the War, acting, politician. Seems like an interesting life, but this still feels like an extended CV, nothing really for a wiki article. Oaktree b (talk) 23:31, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ssilvers, this is part of a "walled garden" of Carmel promo, this ANI will provide more context:[45] (final ANI discussion), which led to the creator's site ban.The editor had a long history of COI and undisclosed paid-editing, poor sourcing, self-published sources, COI sources, and deliberately misrepresenting sources to make subjects appear notable. Additionally, there was LOUTsocking. The editor who deleted some of the material, u|Left guide|Left guide, was working on clean up efforts removing hyperlocal sourcing, paid-COI sourcing, self-published sources, and questionable sources. These were not some random drive-by deletions. The problems went on for many years before the editor was community blocked/banned. Netherzone (talk) 00:21, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, I just read the thread over at ANI, what a situation that was. Oaktree b (talk) 02:49, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The deletions made to the article left it ungrammatical and were done very poorly, leaving a highly misleading picture of the article for reviewers at AfD. Let people review the article with the sources, and we'll see what the result of the AfD really is. -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:23, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Outlands_in_the_Eighty_Acres#History: mentioned there; merge necessary content if possible. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:06, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Re dir can always be created later, but deleting it first gives a level of protection against surreptitious resurrection by COI editors, a real concern with articles around Carmel-by-the-Sea topic demonstrated by multiple block evasion attempts by a certain editor. Graywalls (talk) 06:59, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Meets GNG, which is all that counts here, not the state of the article as it currently stands, nor how it got here. - SchroCat (talk) 08:29, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Agree with immediately preceding comment. Tim riley talk 09:10, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, leaning delete If notability is not met, it is clearly a problem- However. Even if GNG is met, if WP:BIO fails, it violates the BLP policy. Passing mention references aren't that acceptable either. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) Cooldudeseven7 _{join in on the tea talk} 13:13, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

UTC)

Keep - a perfectly notable subject Jack1956 (talk) 21:36, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 12:48, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I’m confused: does the article even claim that he was notable? He was the mayor of a small town. In general, that does not establish notability on Wikipedia. Llajwa (talk) 19:18, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Critically fails WP:NPOL, WP:ANYBIO or WP:GNG. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:58, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Appears to pass WP:ANYBIO, WP:BASIC, and WP:SIGCOV. There are multiple independent book sources from reliable academic publishers, and newspaper articles with in-depth significant coverage. I'm not seeing a valid policy based rationale for deletion.4meter4 (talk) 18:48, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We have "meets GNG" and "fails GNG" as arguments. Can we get a source table? And what's this about violating BLP policy?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 21:07, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:58, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] "'No doubt' money-launderer handcuffed at father's funeral had rights breached". Jersey Evening Post. Jersey Evening Post. Retrieved 18 November 2024.

[2] "How to donate". Friends of Darius Pearce. Retrieved 18 November 2024.

[3] "About Darius". Through Deserts Blog. Friends of Darius Pearce. Retrieved 18 November 2024.

[4] "Darius Pearce Jersey electoral history". Flow.je. Retrieved 18 November 2024.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]