Jared and Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Business: Difference between pages

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 15:08, 12 October 2008

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Business. 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|Business|~~~~}} 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.

Note that 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 links to other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Business.

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

Business

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. Protonk (talk) 17:36, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Yoyo Records

I can't find any reliable sources that show notability. Schuym1 (talk) 11:17, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:08, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:09, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:09, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mr.Z-man 03:35, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:28, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Weak keep Lots of incoming links from notable artists/bands. Maybe tag with unref for cleanup? Lugnuts (talk) 11:28, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
Delete, no establishment of notability or sources. "Tagging" won't do anything other than leave the same thing around longer. Wizardman 03:54, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

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. Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 13:31, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

O+K Research

I speedied this as an A7 but the creator contacted me to point out some sources. Most are in Russian so I am listing here as the benefit of the doubt. Stifle (talk) 22:01, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Confused about withdraw of speedy delete What exactly is the CLAIM of notability in the article? I assume that is why you tagged it, but I still don't see a valid claim, thus would still be speedy delete material. PHARMBOY (TALK) 22:07, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
- I'm just bringing it here to get a more binding decision. Stifle (talk) 20:31, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. -- VG ☎ 13:14, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- VG ☎ 13:15, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

About the claim: those have a funny way of being taken for blatant advertising or PR work on someone's part. We in wiki have a list of market research firms by country, do we not? The british and american lists are quite huge, but the rest of the world is sorely lacking. The claim is simple: either major players in major countries should have articles and be on the list, or the list ought to get binned as well. This seems to be a step towards addressing the issue. Or do we seriously not consider it strange that only ***all of 9 countries*** have their own market research firms (and the Hong Kong one is a regional office of a Dutch-American company anyway)?! Oh, and dear exclusionists, if you are going to go on about it not being nearly as huge as something like Nielsen - I implore you to join the "Let's delete Andorra" club. Aadieu (talk) 22:06, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:41, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Speedy delete Even if you overlooked the blatant WP:COI problems (check the name of the article's author against the name of the company's Moscow director), the WP:RS and WP:V situation cannot be ignored. Ecoleetage (talk) 01:19, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
Delete no notability claims. --Blowdart | ^talk 04:34, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

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 no consensus. Stifle (talk) 08:47, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

MedExpress Urgent Care

debatable notability.. not clearly asserted Versa geek 06:33, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Delete. fails WP:CORP not enough third party sources to establish notability. bordering on advertising. Michellecrisp (talk) 15:17, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
Weak keep The article is not blatant spam, so I've declined the speedy tag placed by Alexius. A Google News Archive search returns a number of third-party, reliable sources about this company, allowing it to narrowly pass WP:CORP. Some are from: Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, The Register-Herald, and another article from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Cunard (talk) 07:33, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:48, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:48, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TravellingCari 20:45, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 14:19, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Weak keep. Operating in multiple states, etc etc. JFW | T@lk 23:00, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

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. Cirt (talk) 00:22, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Kmuch Co.,Ltd.

Non-notable animal feed company in Thailand. Does not satisfy any WP:CORP criterion. Fewer than 10 Google hits. Prod removed without comment by an IP. - IceCreamAntisocial (talk) 16:19, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- Undead Warrior (talk) 17:16, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Thailand-related deletion discussions. -- Eastmain (talk) 06:22, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
Delete Fails WP:CORP. Almost a speedy candidate per advertising. Undead Warrior (talk) 19:56, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:37, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Speedy delete as A7 or G11. Spam and no references. Vegaswikian (talk) 05:59, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

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. Stifle (talk) 08:50, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Loose Connection

Although I think that Loose Connection is an excellent service, I don't see why it merits an article. It's just a small provider, supplying wi-fi to just 19 places. It may possibly be the biggest individual supplier of wi-fi in Brighton & Hove (difficult to tell) but from personal knowledge I can state that the majority of places that provide wi-fi here don't use Loose Connection. Thus there is nothing particularly significant about the organisation. Also, I can't find non-trivial external references. (Some of the external references I can find by Googling were actually written by myself!) A bit iffy (talk) 14:13, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. —A bit iffy (talk) 14:22, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. —A bit iffy (talk) 14:38, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. —A bit iffy (talk) 14:38, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Delete - doesn't meet WP:CORP. A listing of the individual hot spots doesn't help here. Orphaned articles are usually orphaned for a reason. Note: not to be confused with Loose Connection, a notable jazz combo of the 1970s. B.Wind (talk) 04:42, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
Delete An "excellent service" does not mean it needs an article in an encyclopaedia. A little mum-and-pop Wi-Fi shop doesn't meet WP:CORP. MvjsTalking 06:29, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

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 speedily deleted by Anthony Appleyard as blatant advertising. Non-admin closure. Alexius08 (talk) 05:32, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

ValoreBooks.com

Article does not provide any sense of notability. Appears to be advertisement for web site. —G716 <^T·_C> 01:49, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- —G716 <^T·_C> 01:55, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Delete — Contested PROD with nothing but primary sources ... "Article lacks sufficient Attribution for Verifiability of the WP:WEB notability criteria" ... pure weapons-grade Vanispamcruftisement, IMHO ... Happy Editing! — 72.75.82.202 (talk · contribs) _{02:12, 10 October 2008 (UTC)}
Speedy delete and ~~salt~~ lock out: unencyclopedic, blatant advertising, unsourced, unnotable, unverifiable... how can this survive? Alexius08 (talk) 05:14, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

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. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 17:21, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

FastAnt

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

Fails WP:CORP. Biruitorul ^Talk 03:00, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Delete for failure to meet inclusion criteria wrt WP:CORP. Eddie.willers (talk) 23:52, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:01, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TravellingCari 16:21, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 02:36, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Merge to Taylor Bloxham. If Google news is right they are the "the facilities management division of Leicester printer Taylor Bloxham". There are some ghits about them, but they're too weak for a separate article. Even their parent company has some trouble establishing notability on Wikipedia. VG ☎ 03:55, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NuclearWarfare ^{contact me}_{My work} 21:33, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

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. Stifle (talk) 11:04, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Capital Subscription Fund

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

Neologism; no sources; almost no Google hits. Biruitorul ^Talk 02:59, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:01, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TravellingCari 16:21, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 13:17, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Delete as this is not Wiktionary. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 00:21, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, kur ykh 05:23, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Delete. Seems obscure enough that hardly anyone has heard of this type of fund (under 100 ghits for "capital subscription fund"), so it could have been prodded. Also relisted twice... VG ☎ 08:18, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Delete Sounds like a neologism to me with the three Google hits. MvjsTalking 09:23, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

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.

Businesspeople

Barry Gough (businessman)

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

WP:COI article moved to mainspace and skipped AfC in contravention of policy. Paid editor created an article for this businessman and his company, Memento Exclusives, which will also be sent to AfD shortly. In the case of Barry Gough, the sourcing does not support notability under WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. Sources are almost exclusively WP:PRIMARYSOURCE or WP:TRIVIALMENTION. For example, the Mirror piece solely interviews the subject, and the Times article is an as-told-to WP:INTERVIEW. Other sources, in-article and in BEFORE search, are similar. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:01, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and United Kingdom. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:02, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Engineering, Motorsport, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:33, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

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 ‎ speedy delete under criterion G11. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:54, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Omar Jamal Al-Omar

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

Lack of notability. I got fed up with looking at the references; as the identical titles suggest all thosse I looked at were mirrors of the same content. Which is spam flavoured, and is not about the subject of this article. TheLongTone (talk) 14:45, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 14:59, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi TheLongTone, thanks for raising this. You're right that press releases often share similar titles, and that can be frustrating when searching for references.

However, in this case, the references we have come from credible sources. For instance, the OJO Group website lists Omar Jamal Al-Omar as their Chairman and details his role within the company. URL: https://ojogroup.net/chairman-message.

Additionally, the University of Notre Dame's Kroc Institute website showcases Omar's work as their Program Coordinator for the Peace Accords Matrix.

While the titles might be similar, the content itself should provide distinct information about Omar's accomplishments and experience.

If you'd like some help evaluating the references or finding additional ones, feel free to ask! We can work together to ensure this Wikipedia article is well-sourced and informative. Khushboojain191 (talk) 15:00, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kuwait-related deletion discussions. – dudhhr^talk_contribs^she_her 15:52, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Delete. There are no sources present which can be considered reliable, third-party sources to support notability, because literally every source here is a press release. Although some of the venues that opted to publish these press releases may produce their own content and have that content deemed reliable, press releases never establish notability. Lubal (talk) 17:01, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Speedy Delete under WP:A7 and WP:G11. No independent refs and horrifically promotional. Best, GPL93 (talk) 19:50, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Georges Klenkle

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

Does not meet WP:GNG, biographical coverage in independent sources is absent. Cited sources largely just describe FreemiumPlay, a business the subject founded, which might be notable; if an article can be created for that subject, it would make sense to redirect there, but until then I don't see a basis for a page at this title. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 14:24, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 14:24, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:04, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Michael Wallis-Brown

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

Biography of a businessman fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. I reviewed all sources in this WP:REFBOMB and found no WP:SIGCOV in any of them or in BEFORE search; all coverage is WP:TRIVIALMENTION. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:23, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Delete - this is a South African business executive resume and nothing more. The entire article tells us his education background, and all the corporate positions he has held, but nothing about any accomplishments while holding those positions. — Maile (talk) 01:44, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and South Africa. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:53, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Robert Marcus

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

Not meeting WP ANYBIO BoraVoro (talk) 12:29, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Delete: Hardly any coverage of this individual, some mentions while at Time Warner. Even what's now used for sourcing in the article isn't much. Oaktree b (talk) 12:59, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Television, Law, New York, and Rhode Island. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:41, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Danialle Karmanos

AfDs for this article:

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

Routine coverage and awards; no reliable sources. Likely not meeting ANYBIO BoraVoro (talk) 12:33, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Keep: Some coverage of her philanthropy [1], [2], [3]. Sources 2 and 3 I've listed are more about a yoga program she founded, perhaps create the article and redirect there or to the Children's Hospital in Detroit? Oaktree b (talk) 12:58, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, Journalism, Health and fitness, Education, and Michigan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:39, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Winston Utomo

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

Not sufficient sources to meet ANYBIO; sources are more about IDN Media. BoraVoro (talk) 12:49, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Indonesia, Singapore, California, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:34, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Brad Heckman

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

No sources that pass WP:GNG/WP:BASIC/WP:PROF/WP:ARTIST, and I was unable to find any additional sources that meet notability criteria after a search of my own. The majority of sources are not independent of the subject, and some do not contain significant coverage. Several parts of the article read in a promotional tone. ––FormalDude (talk) 09:37, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Artists, Businesspeople, and Social science. ––FormalDude (talk) 09:40, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:09, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Keep: I find this nomination for the deletion of the Brad Heckman article to be both perplexing and unsubstantiated. It appears the nominator made their decision after requesting access to the Wall Street Journal article, which was behind a paywall. If this singular paywalled source was the tipping point for an AfD discussion, we need to reassess what constitutes a careless deletion nomination because this one certainly fits the bill. The Wall Street Journal article in question is entirely about the nonprofit organization that Heckman founded and led. It begs the question: What specifically about that article, which thoroughly discusses Heckman's professional work, convinced the nominator that this article deserved deletion? Let's entertain the notion for a moment that the sources might not be independent of the subject, which seems to be suggested by the nomination. This presumably refers to the TEDx talk given by Heckman. Notability guidelines clearly state that the source must be independent of the subject. TEDx talks, much like interviews in Rolling Stone or other reputable publications, should not be considered non-independent simply because they involve the subject speaking about their work. This rule is better suited for sources like blogs and social media posts, not established platforms like TEDx. Additionally, articles published by universities about their alumni typically reflect the institution's pride and are usually well-researched, as evidenced by the in-depth article from Dickinson College on Heckman's life and achievements. Heckman is a published illustrator and painter, recognized by reputable organizations such as the Combat Antisemitism Movement for his artistic contributions. The mention of his nonprofit offering free mediation services is a factual statement about the organization's purpose, not an advertisement. According to WP:PROMO, a promotional tone is characterized by self-promotion and blatant advocacy, neither of which are present in this article. Wikipedia’s own guidelines suggest tagging articles with {{Promotional tone}} if necessary, rather than nominating them for deletion. I urge my fellow editors to consider these points carefully. The Brad Heckman article is well-supported by independent and reliable sources, and the nomination for deletion appears to be based on a misunderstanding or misinterpretation of Wikipedia's notability and promotional content guidelines. Let's keep this informative and well-documented article. Thank you. 9t5 (talk) 10:19, 29 May 2024 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: 9t5 (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD.

For reference, 9t5 asked me to review this page at User talk:FormalDude § Page review. I checked to see if I had access to all the sources (since I wouldn't want to review it if I didn't) and the only one I couldn't access was the WSJ article. I didn't start reviewing until 9t5 provided me with a link to a free copy of the WSJ source on my talk page (that link now says deleted by the owner, I've reuploaded here). So no, the WSJ wasn't any "tipping point". Nonetheless, it does not contain significant coverage of Heckman, you said it yourself: it's "entirely about the nonprofit organization". It doesn't even mention Heckman's relation to the organization. When you say it "thoroughly discusses Heckman's professional work" I feel like I'm not even reading the same article as you; I can't see how it verifies even a single piece of information about him. ––FormalDude (talk) 11:29, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
@FormalDude “It doesn't even mention Heckman's relation to the organization”… the funny thing is that even without a Wall Street Journal subscription, you are still capable of reading the first paragraph of the article that states “But when I called the Peace Institute, CEO Brad Heckman confirmed my buddy's account”.. quite the thorough review you did. The pdf was set to auto-delete since I don’t have the right to redistribute what is behind a paywall. You could always drop $0.99 and read it on the Wall Street Journal’s website though. Cheers. 9t5 (talk) 07:44, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

@FormalDude But since you are making absolutely untrue statements like “It doesn't even mention Heckman's relation to the organization”.. THIS is the Wall Street Journal article. I went ahead and re-uploaded it. 9t5 (talk) 08:15, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

I see I missed the first two paragraphs which provide us with the one fact that Heckman is the CEO. That's still not significant coverage. Here's my assessment of the article's more promising sources:

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table: prepared by User:FormalDude
WSJ			Entirely about the company, only passing mentions of Heckman.	✘ No
TEDx Talks	This is a speech given by Heckman, clearly not independent.	~ Per RSP, must abide by WP:ABOUTSELF.		✘ No
Dickinson College	Written for and by Heckmen's alma matter, consituting a WP:COISOURCE.	~ May have been provided entirely by Heckmen without any editorial oversight.		✘ No
NYT			Only a passing mention of Heckman.	✘ No
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}}.

––FormalDude (talk) 08:28, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

@FormalDude You literally uploaded a copy of the article with that part and most of the article cut out…? I’m more concerned about that than anything else. 9t5 (talk) 09:21, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

“Written by alma mater”… what?! It’s published on an official university’s .edu website. You have got to be kidding me. Your speculation about universities publishing lies in order to fake the notability of their alumni is not something you need to bring with you when you sit down to review pages. That is absolutely wild to me. @FormalDude 9t5 (talk) 09:42, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

The source being independent of the subject doesn’t mean that their commentary cannot be what the material is. The SOURCE must be independent of the subject.

Wikipedia’s words:

"Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by the article's subject or someone affiliated with it. For example, advertising, press releases, autobiographies, and the subject's website are not considered independent.

Press releases, advertisements, autobiographies and ones own website are completely within our control. If we want, we don’t need to fact check before we publish those sorts off things.

What makes TEDx and other outlets reliable is the fact that the company is independent of the subject. So they won’t post something that is completely BS — they check to make sure it’s true first.

You aren’t understanding what a reference being “independent of the subject” means. 9t5 (talk) 09:34, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Our standards for assessing sources, especially when it comes to notability, are much stricter than "not posting completely BS" and "not publishing lies". Presenting an argument about notability as an argument about TEDx posting completely BS or a university publishing lies is an extreme exaggeration of the actual debate. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 09:46, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

FormalDude: Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material. - WP:SIGCOV the entire article is the authors experience having met Heckman and learned about his company’s mission. You’re telling me that since the company is the main topic that it doesn’t count? That is an absolutely ridiculous thing to go around doing to editors. You’re causing issues where there doesn’t need to be. Good for you. Enjoy your AfD discussion. 9t5 (talk) 09:48, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Are we going to ignore the sentence right before your quote? "Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. tell me you can say with a straight face that WSJ has addressed Brad Heckman as a person directly and in detail. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 09:52, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

I found this AfD after 9t5 brought it up on Discord. I'm not going to formally say Delete or Keep, but I'd like to clarify some things.

First, the WSJ article does not provide significant coverage of Brad Heckman at all. It would be significant coverage of New York Peace Institute, but that does not mean Brad Heckman automatically becomes notable for being the CEO of it.
Speeches at TEDx do not confer notability. Based on the TED brand, I'd be more inclined to believe that a TED speaker is notable, but I would not conclude notability just based on giving a speech at TED alone. TEDx is a different story, see this: Every TEDx event is independently curated by volunteers who generously invest their time to spotlight valuable ideas from and for their community. That means each speaker is selected by those volunteers without influence from sponsors, government, or any organizations. I've seen TEDx speakers spread pseudoscience, so TEDx doesn't really help establish notability.
There is some level of independence in an article published by the person's alma mater, but even if you argue that it counts towards GNG, it is still very weak and wouldn't satisfy GNG requiring multiple sources. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 09:35, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

@0xDeadbeef I’m at least happy other people are participating.

When the discussion is between the articles author and the nominator and nobody else then what is the point? 9t5 (talk) 09:44, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Delete: After cutting through all the puffery (promotional tones) in the article, I'm not seeing what makes this person notable. Fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:GNG from my POV. Also noting that I became aware of this nomination when 9t5 was criticizing the nominator for questioning the notability of the article on the community Discord. Hey man im josh (talk) 10:16, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
@Hey man im josh Can I ask a question? What is promotional sounding about it? Could you give me a few quotes so I can better understand what is even being referenced? 9t5 (talk) 15:25, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

I am going to step away from this AfD and come back to it next week so that a discussion can be had. I don’t want to disrupt the conversation with my frustrations as the author of the article. I still stand by my point above. Cheers. 9t5 (talk) 16:11, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Delete, with possible alternative of redirect to a stub on the NY Peace Institute. I'm not seeing any serious case for WP:NPROF, and I didn't find reviews of the one book. That leaves GNG. I see a lot of passing mentions along the lines of the "Ask Real Estate" bit in the NYTimes, but nothing more. I think it is well short of WP:SIGCOV. I agree that the article feels a bit promotional, but it is not so bad as for WP:TNT, and this did not factor into my !vote. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 17:17, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

T. V. Mohandas Pai

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

Article correctly tag bombed for over 5 years. The subject fails WP:GNG and WP:N. The sources are also promotional or unreliable. Ratnahastin (talk) 05:51, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and India. Shellwood (talk) 09:13, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Karnataka-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Chris Miller (West Virginia politician)

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

Non-notable former political candidate. No in-depth coverage outside of his gubernatorial campaign, no real claim to notability. All campaign-related coverage of him is fairly WP:ROTM stuff that you would expect of someone running for governor. Now that his campaign is over, I can't imagine very many people will be searching for him. I'd support a redirect to 2024 West Virginia gubernatorial election. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 02:37, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Politicians, and West Virginia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:07, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Lean delete. His unsuccessful candidacy for the Republican nomination for governor is not all that notable, although his ownership of several automobile dealerships (not just Kia) has made his television ads rather ubiquitous (and somewhat amusing, IMO) throughout the region for a number of years. I doubt that there is enough coverage in the news besides his political candidacy to demonstrate notability, however. I'm not certain of this, and would be perfectly satisfied if anyone can produce additional evidence of notability. But just owning the dealerships and having thrown his hat into the ring for the Republican nomination (in a particularly nasty campaign season in West Virginia) does not seem like enough. P Aculeius (talk) 10:09, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Delete and redirect: as a West Virginia resident myself, I can attest to the fact that Chris Miller has not gained hardly any notably even in his own state; let alone on a scale sufficient for a Wikipedia article. I would support deleting and adding a redirect to 2024 West Virginia gubernatorial election. 2601:5C5:4201:68B0:D114:AF19:31D6:322B (talk) 18:25, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

David Calloway Ross, Jr.

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

Dubious notability, zero hits from RS in Google, created by an SPA intent on promoting a business the article's subject managed Fastily 20:56, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Missouri. Shellwood (talk) 21:27, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Alabama and Georgia (U.S. state). WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:10, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
Delete, fails to establish what the individual is actually notable for - no notable achievements apart from running a small local funeral parlour. Dan arndt (talk) 00:02, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Delete--I don't see any notability for this person either. Drmies (talk) 17:24, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
- I understand the concerns raised about the article's subject, David Calloway Ross, Jr. However, I'd like to provide additional context and evidence to support his notability. While it's true that Ross's achievements may not be globally recognized, his contributions to the local community and funeral services industry are significant. As the president and funeral director of Ross-Clayton Funeral Home, he has:Continued the legacy of his family's business, which has been serving the community for over 100 years; Provided leadership and guidance to the funeral home, ensuring its continued operation and service to the community; Demonstrated a commitment to the local community through his involvement in various organizations and initiatives; Regarding the lack of Google search results, I'd like to point out that not all notable individuals have a strong online presence. This doesn't diminish Ross's achievements or impact on the community.
  As for the article being created by a single-purpose account (SPA), I assure you that my intention is not to promote a business but to document Ross's historical significance and contributions. I believe the article meets Wikipedia's guidelines for notability and verifiability. Ross's achievements may not be widely recognized, but they are notable in the context of his community and industry. I'm willing to work with you to improve the article and address any concerns. Please consider retaining the article. Mcrossphd (talk) 17:25, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
  - Currently he does NOT meet our requirements; what is needed is reliable secondary sourcing. You argued that the Ross-Clayton funeral home is the oldest in the city--that's not even verified and I'm not sure it's true. There's a few mentions in a few books, but nothing of significance. If you would produce reliable secondary sources, that would be a different matter. Drmies (talk) 17:27, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
  - The article on the business by Brad Harper is maybe a small step on the way to notability, but that's for the business, not the person. I note also that neither Harper nor the historical marker (I'm surprised the Alabama Historical Society accepted that text) make the "oldest funeral home" claim. BTW I'm about to write up the article on Lincoln Cemetery--there is no doubt that that is notable, on the basis of secondary sources and history. For this person, that argument is hard to make though perhaps the business might be notable. Drmies (talk) 17:33, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
    - Sir, please review Historical Marker Database for reliable source for Ross Clayton Funeral Home's History. Also view link for David Callaway Ross's notability references Mcrossphd (talk) 17:45, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
      - Mrcrossphd, please don't call me "sir"--"Drmies" will do just fine, thanks. Historical markers are not generally accepted as acceptable secondary sources here, and that particular text is so blatantly non-neutral. Let me put it another way: it would be somewhat silly to dispute the facts on a marker (the Historical Association--Scotty Kirkland runs that--checks it) but we shouldn't be using historical markers as the basis for our articles. A historical marker is an indication of some importance, but not by itself a guarantor of notability. I've done that Google search, but better: I looked at Google News and Google Books. Your search, unfortunately, does not deliver a single reliable secondary source; if you correct "callaway" to "calloway" and check news, you at least get the obituary from WSFA, but that's really all. If you had checked "books", you'd have found this--but again, that's not much. Sorry. Drmies (talk) 20:57, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
        I want to highlight two references regarding Ross Clayton Funeral Home notability as mentioned in ref. 1 and ref. 2.also see Google Search Result Mcrossphd (talk) 13:19, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Aluko Damilola Grand SADG

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

Fails WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO. This is literally a non-notable subject, no sources whatsoever to establish notability. Spammy, promotional puffery, this should probably be Speedy deleted. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:21, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Nigeria. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:43, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
Delete: Speedy per Vanderwaalforces. The article is purely about a non notable person that doesn't meet Wikipedia guidelines for entry. Promotional self creation! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 23:42, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Scott Michaels

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:BIO and WP:GNG, with no significant secondary coverage in RS. The best I could find in a WP:BEFORE search was a few interviews in essentiallysports.com, and the rest is social media, press releases, and some coverage in WP:THESUN and WP:DAILYEXPRESS. Strong aroma of UPE here, including this addition today of a selfie, unavailable on the source claimed at Commons.

Please note that the first AFD was about a writer and filmmaker, and not about the football businessman. Wikishovel (talk) 19:52, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Football, and England. Wikishovel (talk) 19:52, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 19:54, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
Delete - no evidence of notability. Obviously promotional. If sources are found please ping me. Giant Snowman 19:57, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
Delete—Almost feels like self-promotion. Anwegmann (talk) 21:55, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
Delete Does feel somewhat promo, agree with nomination, this should be a straight up delete. Govvy (talk) 21:57, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
Delete – Per above. Svartner (talk) 13:32, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Jason Ojalvo

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

So, paid creation (not undisclosed for this one, oddly enough, clearly they were blocked for a different creation), WP:RESUME and all that. Obviously, we also want to ask, is Ojalvo notable? From what I can tell, all the coverage seems to be "Ojavo, executive, says", "Ojavo, CEO, says". "Ojavo gets hired as CEO", that kind of thing. Honestly, the paid editor did a pretty good job of looking for sources here, I think the two Guardian articles are about as good as it gets, and I don't think I see any major omissions from the article. I did find a random podcast interview but that's not suitable for obvious reasons.

Now, Grammy would of course normally be an ANYBIO here, obviously, easy review, but the article... credits it to the Audible Studios program? (I don't think the program can win a Grammy? So it must have been awarded to Ojavo?) I don't usually speculate on these things, but being co-awarded a Grammy because they were an Amazon executive? Uh... I kinda doubt that was what people had in mind when they drafted that part of the guideline. I mean I guess it's technically possible to verify they shared it with Janis Ian, but... is there any plausible argument there's any coverage for this? I think it's a reasonable interpretation of BLP policy that we do eventually want actual sources describing this actual thing that happened (the first two AfDs I've found on similar cases B.A.M. and Eric Sullivan seems to support this).

Overall, I would support some sort of redirect, but they're not actually mentioned at 55th Annual Grammy Awards § Spoken Word, and well... I'm probably going to create a Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tushy (company) within the week as well (watch this space!). I suppose it would be a fine target for now, and maybe Audiobook Creation Exchange if it gets deleted? I don't think we need to pick a perfect target here though. I know this is extremely verbose, but there was a lot to get through. I might exceed the cumulative 500-word mark if responding to any concerns, I hope everyone is alright with that. Alpha3031 (t • c) 14:44, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and New York. Alpha3031 (t • c) 14:44, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Conor O'Callaghan (businessman)

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

Non-notable congressional candidate. He received some attention from national outlets right when he announced his campaign in August of last year, but that's to be expected of any candidate in a competitive House race. From what I can see, he's received zero national news coverage since September 2023. All of the articles cited on the page are campaign-related, and I can't find any non-campaign-related coverage of him on Google from any time, so I don't think he meets GNG. Very much reminiscent of Kellen Curry, another 2024 congressional candidate who got national news attention right when he launched and promptly faded from view. I'd support a redirect to 2024 United States House of Representatives elections in Arizona#District 1. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 02:44, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Politicians, Ireland, Arizona, and Pennsylvania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:06, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Support either redirect or outright deleteing, as even with the bit of coverage he has received more recently (he appears to be running a generally more negative campaign rel. to the other 5 in the race) I don't believe he meets notability standards. Buggie111 (talk) 14:30, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
Delete: not meeting criminal notability; simply being a political candidate isn't notable. Can be re-created if he wins the political seat, otherwise, not meeting notability. Oaktree b (talk) 14:52, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
Redirect/Weak keep: I support a redirect to 2024 United States House of Representatives elections in Arizona. That being said, while he doesn't meet WP:NPOL for being a candidate, it's possible he meets WP:BASIC. What makes this different from other cases, in my opinion, is that the candidature coverage is not WP:MILL. He's received a significant amount of coverage that specifically goes into detail about his career before running for office. For example, this Bloomberg article and this MSNBC article. C F A 💬 01:09, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- I agree that the national coverage of him isn't run of the mill, but the problem is that the only non-ROTM coverage he ever received came right when he announced his campaign. As I said in the nomination, he's received no national attention since September 2023. It seems like he made a splash right when he announced because he's running in a competitive congressional race, but I don't think that translates to lasting notability. If he loses this race, will anyone be searching his name in 5-10 years? BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 04:00, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
Hi! I made this article...I lost my login for AZVoter so I'll go in my thought process here. Conor has the most cash on hand out of any candidate other than the incumbent in this race. He is polling alright and has four endorsements from people in the US house of reps. So he definitely is getting national recognition. But you are correct, if he loses he will probably be irrelevant. The negative campaigning is something I wanted to add but this was my first article so I did not really know what to write about. JustMadeThis4Discussion (talk) 02:04, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
- Raising money and getting a couple endorsements from members of Congress is not what I meant by "national attention" (we're talking about news coverage here) and does not establish notability. See WP:NPOL. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 02:41, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Abdul Azim Badakhshi

AfDs for this article:

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

The first nomination was withdrawn and not properly discussed. I am not convinced the subject meets the criteria for "Sport personality" according to WP:SPORTSPERSON. I would like to discuss it further as the subject does not meet WP:NMMA criteria. Having fought in ACB, AFC, Brave FC, is not enough and the subject has not been ranked in the world top 10 as per WP:NMMA. Lekkha Moun (talk) 18:13, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Keep I withdrawn my request cuz as a Persian language user I find and confirm the authenticity of the sources which meet WP:SPORTSPERSON clearly:
- BBC (1) (2)
- The Independent (3)
- Hindustan Times (4) (5) (6)
- Afghanistan International (7) (8) (9) (10) (11)
- ESPN (12) (13)
- UFC (14)
- The Print (15) (16)
- Radio Azadi (17) (18) (19) (20) (21)

Claggy (talk) 19:33, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Keep Greetings, Your concern is understandable. But He clearly meet WP:SPORTSPERSON and Wp:Bio , Despite of being a athlete, He has become a national symbol in Afghanistan, with support from the Millions of Afghans including former President, ministers, and other officials who recognize his achievements.

His journey is completely motivator for new generation in Afghanistan and India. Besides his sports career, he is a successful motivator, investor, and human rights activist, I hope this satisfies your concerns.Parwiz ahmadi (talk) 22:07, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Sportspeople, Martial arts, Afghanistan, and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:12, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Pemmasani Chandra Sekhar

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

I believe this is similar to Sanjog Waghere. A WP:BEFORE search on Pemmasani Chandra Sekhar has a lot of reliable sources, but they all focus on his candidacy in the 2024 Indian general election, making it a case of WP:BLP1E. Fails to meet GNG/NPOL. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 06:55, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and Politicians. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 06:55, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Andhra Pradesh-related deletion discussions. Wikishovel (talk) 07:56, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Wikishovel (talk) 07:56, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
Delete: As per my check, I searched for coverage about the subject other then the candidacy, but I can’t found any. These sources are because of his candidacy. WP:BLP1E simply apply here. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL. But I found someone who is saying “I am rather challenging the blanket assumption that (editorial) obituaries do not count towards notability.” Here. GrabUp - Talk 09:17, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
Delete. Candidacy in general election is not notable. Per nom. Fails WP:NPOL. The degree of significance of the subject and of role as doctor and politician is not enough to warrant a page on the subject. RangersRus (talk) 13:44, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
Weak redirect to Guntur Lok Sabha constituency#General Election 2024, mostly on WP:NOTPROMO grounds. Otherwise keep. I do not think the grounds for deletion raised above are policy-based. (1) NPOL avoids extending a presumption of notability to candidates, but recognizes that they are still notable if they meet the GNG. There doesn't seem to be any dispute that GNG-compliant sourcing is available. (2) The question is therefore whether BLP1E applies. But BLP1E does not apply, because a candidate in a general election for a national legislature is not someone who otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual. As WP:LOWPROFILE reminds us, [p]ersons who actively seek out media attention are not low-profile, regardless of whether or not they are notable. (3) The remaining question, although not raised above, would be whether BIO1E applies. IMO it would be questionable to interpret "one event" in BIO1E/BLP1E so broadly as to encompass an entire election campaign; that would go well beyond any ordinary or on-wiki understanding of "one event". In any event, if BIO1E does apply, it counsels us to redirect to our coverage of the event, not to delete the page outright. -- Visviva (talk) 19:55, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Joe Carter (reporter)

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

This biography lacks any sources that are significant coverage. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 02:03, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, Television, Colorado, and Florida. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 02:03, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Delete. Steakvault who created the article, and nothing else, was immediately blocked as a Spam-advertising only account. — Maile (talk) 02:23, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Advertising, Sports, Georgia (U.S. state), Illinois, and South Carolina. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:01, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Daniel Ruiz II

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

Chiefs of staff do not count as a political office for purposes of NPOL, and it doesn't seem like there is sufficient coverage to meet the standards of WP:BASIC unfortunately. Deprod by Clearfrienda, not sure which sources they were referring to, perhaps the AP? Alpha3031 (t • c) 15:42, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Politicians, and Arizona. Alpha3031 (t • c) 15:42, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
Comment: In cases where there is some substantial coverage I usually object with PRODs in case there's a chance they can be kept. In this case, there's this local 12news.com article and this ktar.com article which both go WP:INDEPTH. There are some less-significant mentions in this NYT article, this kold.com article, and this azcentral.com article. I'd lean towards delete but it's a close call. Clear friend a ^💬 16:16, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Simon Adozi

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

Fails WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO. There's not a source that is independent of the subject. Some are WP:ROUTINE coverages which announce him bagging an award, they all appear in exactly copy, verbatim. Others are his opinions, etc. No source can be used to establish GNG here. Some are "Why is did this" and "Why I did that"-ish, while others are "How we're doing this" and "How we're doing that"-ish, which falls under WP:RUNOFTHEMILL. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:57, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Nigeria. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 15:09, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
Delete: "40 under 40 awards" are not notable, nor do the others appear to be notable. Typical PROMO articles that we see from Nigeria that pop up here. Oaktree b (talk) 23:12, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
Weak Keep -

- Vanguared: Generally unreliable per WP:NGRS

- nairametrics is mostly quotations, considered unreliable

- Youtube is an interview, considered unreliable

- businessday - mostly quotations, considered unreliable

- tmynewspaper - mostly quotations, considered unreliable

- punchng is about his company, with some mentions of him. Not enough to count towards notability.

- Independent - There is enough here to count towards notability. Some quotations. Publication is generally reliable per WP:NGRS.

- Guardian - like the above, good one. generally reliable per WP:NGRS.

- leadership - based on an interview, not reliable.

- Guardian - based on an interview, not reliable.

- thenationonlineng - based on an interview, not reliable.

- The Sun - This is a good article and publication reliable per WP:NGRS.

Summary: I found 3 articles to be acceptable, which in my opinion is barely enough for a keep, so a weak keep is my vote.Hkkingg (talk) 08:44, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

You clearly do not know what WP:GNG talks about, kindly read that. I don’t want to waste my time on a source assessment. There’s, as a matter of fact, no source that satisfies GNG. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:03, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

3 of the sources are from reliable publications per WP:NGRS and have significant coverage. How exactly are these not within WP:GNG? I realize that many of these decisions are subjective, while one person may decide something is a valid source another may not think so. You don't need to argue every person that opposes your nomination. Let the admins be the judge. Hkkingg (talk) 19:21, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

@Hkkingg It is imperative that I let you know that if there's anyone to analyse and assess WP:NGRS here, it should be me or any other Nigerian who knows very well about how Nigerian media works, don't be deceived. And again, this is a deletion discussion, and we are bound to argue things out. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:22, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Delete: per nomination above. ᗩvírαm7 • [@píng mє] 05:27, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Rajan Simkhada

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

It reflects poorly on us to host blatant spam like this. I went in to clean it up but couldn't find sources to support a Wikipedia biography. Most links are dead but those that I could access didn't support the claims or cover him in any depth. The is WP:UPE spam and the subject fails WP:GNG. Usedtobecool ☎️ 11:26, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Authors, Businesspeople, and Nepal. Usedtobecool ☎️ 11:26, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
Delete. Though the references presented in article from reference no.7 to 10 is reliable and independent to the subject but I didn't find any significant coverage on him to establish notability. Fade258 (talk) 03:50, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Mark Bauman

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

Moved unilaterally to mainspace after prior draftification. I see poor referencing, churnalism, and lists of "stuff" albeit as prose. WP:BIO insists on references for facts subject to challenge, and there is a shortfall, so I see a WP:BIO failure. I also see WP:ADMASQ for a WP:ROTM "cross-platform media executive, filmmaker, print and broadcast journalist, and environmentalist." doing his job. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:51, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:51, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Delete: PROMO. The sourcing used is either primary or passing mentions. Nothing we'd use for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 16:57, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Delete - Refer to my /Decode subpage (linked in my signature as "critiques").

I can't assess https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/12/business/grid-news-site-live.html (walled).
https://www.axios.com/2021/07/10/dc-journalists-launch-media-company is useless for notability (too sparse). No discussion of Bauman.
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2023/03/grid-news-the-messenger-startup is useless for notability (too sparse). Name-drop, zero discussion of Bauman.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/30/tech-exec-invests-in-digital-news-startup-launched-by-veteran-journalists.html is useless for notability (too sparse). No discussion of Bauman; everything seemingly about him is actually claims about the startup attributed to Bauman.
https://digiday.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2023/07/DIGIDAY-MEDIA-AWARDS_Winners-Guide-2023_062923-2.pdf is a non-sequitur.
I can't assess https://www.adweek.com/media/laura-mcgann-has-reimagined-reporting-using-an-intersectional-structurally-focused-approach/ (walled). Given the article is about someone else, I can't imagine this is too useful for an article on Bauman.
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20181001-is-this-the-last-chance-to-see-the-titanic is useless for notability (too sparse, possibly wrong subject). Shit He Says, no actual discussion of Bauman. I should note that my own search for sources (string: "Mark Bauman") returned primarily non-responsive content, so I would be very concerned about conflating multiple Mark Baumans.
https://web.archive.org/web/20190519214223/https://www.virtualwonders.com/ is useless for notability (website homepage).
https://thinkwellgroup.com/blog/2020/08/21/exploring-the-details-with-virtual-wonders/ is useless for notability (too sparse). No discussion of Bauman.
https://wyse.gmu.edu/mark-bauman/ is useless for notability (connexion to subject). I note this bio omits anything involving GRID or any media startups; one would think, given their journalism pedigree is mentioned, that these would be brought up.
https://thepearsoninstitute.org/speaker/mark-bauman is useless for notability (connexion to subject). The image on this page looks like a completely different guy from the WYSE image, disregarding the glasses.
https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/ng-live-engineering-exploration-technology/ is useless for notability (connexion to subject).
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2004-oct-17-ca-cinefile17_-story.html is useless for notability (too sparse). Shit He Says, no discussion of Bauman.
https://www.documentary.org/column/festival-focus-national-geographic-all-roads-film-festival is useless for notability (too sparse). Name-drop.
We don't cite IMDb (no editorial oversight).
https://www.media.mit.edu/events/media-lab-conversations-series-mark-bauman/ is useless for notability (connexion to subject). Event programme.
https://www.darwinfoundation.org/en/about/our-people2/board-of-directors/ is useless for notability (connexion to subject). He's on the BoD for the Darwin Foundation.
https://www.asoc.org/about/our-team/#board is useless for notability (connexion to subject). Again, BoD.
https://conservefish.org/news/marine-fish-conservation-network-welcomes-tom-sadler-new-deputy-director-mark-bauman-board-directors-member/ is useless for notability (connexion to subject, no editorial oversight). Press release from an organisation he was joining.
https://voicesforbiodiversity.org/about/advisory-board is useless for notability (connexion to subject). Advisory board listing.
We can't use https://wyse.gmu.edu/ (website homepage).
https://mediaschool.indiana.edu/news-events/news/item.html?n=media-school-visiting-professors-include-award-winning-media-executive-and-npr-tv-critic is useless for notability (connexion to subject). News from a university who's bringing him on as a guest professor.
https://www.cmu.edu/homepage/creativity/2010/fall/gigapixel-show.shtml is useless for notability (too sparse, connexion to subject). Name-drop in an article about an event CMU is holding.
We can't use either YouTube source (unknown provenance). YouTube videos must be (1) produced by an outlet we would consider to be a reliable source and (2) uploaded to that outlet's verified channel to be linked to, let alone cited.
https://thepearsoninstitute.org/globalforum2022 is useless for notability (connexion to subject). Expo held by an organisation he's on the BoD of, and where he was scheduled to speak.
We can't use https://www.erskine.edu/2023/02/07/stukes-lecture-set-for-march-1/ (unknown provenance). No byline; who wrote this? (If this is a press release, it's useless for notability (no editorial oversight).)
https://www.iinteract.org/about-us is useless for notability (connexion to subject). Advisory board listing.
https://www.wliw.org/about/awards/ is a non-sequitur.
https://crossingborders.education/people/mark-bauman/ is useless for notability (connexion to subject). Advisory board listing.

None of the sources I can assess are any good. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 17:33, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Businesspeople, Journalism, Environment, Russia, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:10, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Well, here's a link for the NY Times article, it isn't about the person discussed here, mostly about the Grid website [4] Oaktree b (talk) 23:24, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Delete - coverage is from primary sources, IMDB or passing mentions. Hkkingg (talk) 19:28, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

I've already made many edits based on reviews and thought it was ready for mainspace. Can someone please help me redraft this article to meet Wikipedia standards? Terry Phillips (talk) 20:59, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Unless you find much better sources, any effort at redrafting would be futile. We're looking for in-depth, non-routine, independent-of-Bauman news/scholarly sources that discuss him at length, are written by identifiable authors, and subjected to rigourous editorial oversight and fact-checking. Without those, the subject cannot hope to meet WP:N or WP:BLP. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 21:08, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Margot Davy

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

Subject doesn’t seem to pass WP:GNG. Does appearing on notable fashion platform calls for a Wikipedia page? Because we have so many people appearing on notable fashion platform but no independent reliable sources. Most of the source on the page just only talked about her appearing and nothing more. Meligirl5 (talk) 11:51, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Women, and Fashion. Meligirl5 (talk) 11:51, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Comment Also this seems to be like a promotional work, paid work or a conflict of interest.--Meligirl5 (talk) 12:03, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Delete: I tried a search in .fr sites, and even then, we have only a few photo shoots that come up. "Muse of the Month" [5] is about the extent of coverage I could find, it's simply a photospread and some small text. Delete for not meeting notability requirements and a lack of sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 13:58, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Advertising and France. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 14:50, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Omid Mehrpour

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

Lacks significant coverage in third-party reliable sources. The current sources do not provide the required coverage about the subject, as they are either passing mentions, profiles, or not reliable. GSS ^💬 10:14, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Iran. GSS ^💬 10:14, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Keep: This subject deserves a Wikipedia Page as per WP:Academics. It fulfills The criteria for academic personals.
Shortcuts
- WP:NACADEMIC
- WP:NECONOMIST

As per the criteria, a subject is considered notable if it fulfills one of the listed criteria. In this case the subject fulfills 1 or more of the WP:Academics criteria as following.

Criteria 1a: Highly Cited publications

•The subject is among top 2% of highly cited scientists according to the Stanford/Elsevier database. 1

•The subject has also high citation metrics on Google scholar. 2 Here below is the list of some scholars with equal status having Wikipedia page and lesser citations on google scholar than this subject for comparison:

1. Ahmad Reza Djali, his Google Scholar Metrics 3

2. Saba Valadkhan, her google scholar Metrics 4

3. Neda Alijani, his google scholar Metrics 5

Criteria 1d: The subject has served as editorial board member of known scientific journals. 6 7 8 9 10

Criteria 1e. The subject had been selected in competitive fellowships 11 12

Criteria 2: The subject has been awarded academic awards. 13

As per the criteria for academic peoples, the subject is notable enough for having separate Wikipedia page. Joidfybvc (talk) 10:06, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. GSS ^💬 10:30, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 12:19, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Weak keep: I'm not sure the academic awards are notable; his publication records seems ok. Just passing academic notability. Lots of fluff now in the article, but we can edit that. Oaktree b (talk) 13:02, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Keep: An article that weakly meets WP:SIGCOV. I am also certain of meeting WP:NAUTHOR from researches and publications. I'm considering this for a second chance though. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 18:02, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Lyazzat Tanysbay

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

Fails WP:ANYBIO / WP:JOURNALIST BoraVoro (talk) 14:53, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, Journalism, and Kazakhstan. Skynxnex (talk) 15:09, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
Keep, looks unquestionably notable to me. Geschichte (talk) 03:43, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
Keep, agree on notability.JoeNMLC (talk) 14:53, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:36, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Eunice J. Buah

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

Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. Council of State members are not inherently notable and there’s not enough source to establish GNG. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:34, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Politicians, and Ghana. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 20:33, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 20:34, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:55, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Matt Hannaford

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

despite being flagged for improvement for nearly a decade now, the article still has major issues. much of the article seems to be either original research, or things Matt has been only involved with tangentially (like stars his coworkers at the company represented). this could be improved if the article met WP:BIO, but even that seems doubtful. Free Realist 9 (talk) 13:03, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Sportspeople. Free Realist 9 (talk) 13:03, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:27, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions. Let'srun (talk) 22:49, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:44, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Stephan Welk

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

Non-notable person. While the sources provided all seem to be on the up-and-up, the overwhelming majority of them either are to websites that are now up for sale, return 404 errors, or flat-out can't be connected to. The sources that do properly function are all useless for notability - two are hits in catalogues for a book he wrote and the third is a non-sequitur. A search for sources brings up two Der Spiegel pieces about diplomatic document fraud and nothing else accessible or reliable. I will note that there is a BLP/N thread about this article (which is how I found it) but my putting it up for AfD is due to the sourcing woes and not because of the thread. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 16:26, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Germany. Shellwood (talk) 17:03, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:10, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:10, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Comment: Was any effort made to recover the dead links from the Internet Archive or other archival services? The two cited sources for this individual's influence on the global cocoa market, for example, are recoverable: [6][7], although I can't vouch for the reliability of the media outlet. That is a singular outlet, however; Bayern-Depesche's masthead notes that it is owned by "POPULAREN Network GmbH", so while these sources are independent of the article subject, they're likely not distinct sources for counting such things. Meanwhile, there's definitely Der Spiegel coverage, but some of it has involves a then-ongoing trial. I couldn't quickly determine if there was a conviction, or even if it had concluded. Lubal (talk) 23:36, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
I just put the Bayern-Depesche archived link into Google Translate and got borderline-word-salad off of it, but it's comprehensible enough for me to grok it. And it's useless for notability (too sparse). The article itself seems a confused mess, hardly touching on Welk and his actions in favour of descriptions of Sao Tome and Principe and a chocolatier associated with him. Google Translate ignores the Popularen source entirely, so I can't assess that (language barrier). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 08:04, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Brad Chambers

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

This article has a lot of citations, but it's not as impressive as it first seems. Of the 36 pages cited: 3 are routine campaign coverage from local outlets, 1 is a Decision Desk HQ election results page, 9 are press releases or other pages on the Indiana Economic Development Corporation's website, 2 don't even mention Chambers, 2 are paywalled, 6 are campaign website citations, 5 take the format of "Brad Chambers announces ____ plan" and seem to be based off the aforementioned campaign website pages, and 2 are duplicates of other sources. The remaining few are more in-depth articles about his gubernatorial campaign or his appointment as state commerce secretary from Indiana-based publications (not anything he did in office, just his appointment). Nothing stands out about his candidacy that would warrant a standalone Wikipedia article; he was never a frontrunner and didn't really do anything noteworthy. And he certainly doesn't have any other argument for passing GNG, either via his (appointed) position as state commerce secretary or otherwise. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 03:51, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Indiana. Kpg jhp jm 07:00, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:55, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Keep: State secretary of commerce is a notable position; we have enough for at least a basic article, maybe needs a rewrite, but the individual would meet political notability. Oaktree b (talk) 14:04, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

@Oaktree b: On what basis are you arguing this? If it was a statewide elected office, you would be correct, but a statewide appointed official is not considered automatically notable. There are thousands of unelected positions in state government, they aren't all notable. Can you link me some other state secretaries of commerce who have Wikipedia pages? Or anyone else who's held an appointed position in Indiana state government that got a Wikipedia page solely on that basis? BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 18:11, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Is it not a ministerial position in the state government? Here in Ontario, the Minister of Commerce would get their own article. Elected or not, if it's a cabinet-level position, we've always held them to meet NPOL. Oaktree b (talk) 18:13, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

@Oaktree b: In Indiana, the secretary of commerce and president of the Indiana Economic Development Corp. is part of the governor's cabinet. [8] AHoosierPolitico (talk) 19:09, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

I would assume that still passed NPOL. Oaktree b (talk) 19:31, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Comment: Is it not a member of the state's legislature? It would fall under here [9] Oaktree b (talk) 18:16, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

@Oaktree b: Please try to familiarize yourself more with US politics before participating in discussions like these. No, the state secretary of commerce is not part of the state legislature, nor is it a particularly high-profile position. Again: if you're so confident that this position satisfies NPOL, you should be able to link some people who served as Indiana Secretary of Commerce (or any other equivalent appointed position in a US state's cabinet) who got a Wikipedia page on that basis alone. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk)

Keep per WP:POLOUTCOMES and Oaktree b. Elected and appointed political figures at the national cabinet level are generally regarded as notable, as are usually those at the major sub-national level (US state, Canadian province, etc.) in countries where executive and/or legislative power is devolved to bodies at that level. Also see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Johnson (Alaska politician) and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James H. Baxter Jr. for precedent of state cabinet secretaries kept. TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 00:25, 15 May 2024 (UTC) Struck TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 17:49, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Isn't that what I explained above? I participated in both votes that you've linked, one had good coverage, the other doesn't. He's a member of the sub-national gov't. US Politics is pretty much like Canada, we have the parliamentary system, the US doesn't. Both work basically the same. Oaktree b (talk) 00:41, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
Delete the vast majority of coverage is about his failed gubernatorial run, not about his appointment to a position which doesn't necessarily pass WP:NPOL (there is very little coverage of him in his cabinet position.) So I don't think the position merits the NPOL assumption when it clearly does not receive significant press coverage apart from his appointment. SportingFlyer T·C 23:14, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 06:00, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Comment does not appear to be presumptively notable under WP:NPOL; cabinet level positions are the widely agreed threshold (see detailed discussion here for state-level executive branch NPOL thresholds: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alexandra Schimmer), however, Commerce does not appear to be part of the current Governor's Cabinet in Indiana. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 06:40, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

@Goldsztajn: and @TulsaPoliticsFan: The terms "secretary of commerce" and "president of the Indiana Economic Development Corp." are interchangeable, as the secretary of commerce leads the Indiana Economic Development Corporation as its president. [10]. You can find different media outlets using both terms, but both refer to the cabinet-level position. AHoosierPolitico (talk) 16:36, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Good find! I'll strike my keep vote. TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 17:51, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Pinging @TulsaPoliticsFan in fairness to the GF responses to my contributions, see developments below. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 02:36, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Comment: The terms "secretary of commerce" and "president of the Indiana Economic Development Corp." are interchangeable, as the secretary of commerce leads the Indiana Economic Development Corporation as its president. [11]. You can find different media outlets using both terms, but both refer to the cabinet-level position. AHoosierPolitico (talk) 16:36, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
@AHoosierPolitico Agreed, the Governor's cabinet includes a seat for a representative from the Indiana Economic Development Corporation. According to the article you've linked, which includes the headline "Lathrop elevated to cabinet", it is Ann Lathrop, Chief Strategy Officer, that took the cabinet position; so the President/CEO of the IEDC does not necessarily appear to automatically take the seat. From that article, there's nothing explicit that indicates Brad Chambers previously held the Cabinet seat. I have no problem accepting an NPOL pass if there's sourcing that explicitly shows Brad Chambers held a cabinet seat. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 23:58, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
@Goldsztajn Perhaps I should have referenced a different article, as Governor Holcomb's decision to appoint Lathrop to his cabinet, in addition to Rosenberg as secretary of commerce and president of the Indiana Ecomomic Development Corporation, was unique. As the state's new release on the appointment notes, "Lathrop will join Rosenberg on Gov. Holcomb’s cabinet." [12] For sourcing that he held a cabinet-level position, see this article. [13] "Chambers signed a two-year contract with the state when he accepted the cabinet-level position in June 2021." Best, AHoosierPolitico (talk) 02:08, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for finding the extra sourcing, that's enough for an NPOL pass for me. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 02:30, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
The trouble with an NPOL pass is that it necessarily assumes there will be GNG coverage, which is almost always true. Problem is there's not - he's basically just covered by his failed gubernatorial run. SportingFlyer T·C 00:19, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
@SportingFlyer I disagree. If you search "Brad Chambers" during the timeframe that coincides with his tenure (July 2021 - August 2023), you will find consistent coverage in Indiana media. The article itself talks about some of what earned him coverage: the Regional Economic Acceleration and Development Initiative, the LEAP District, the Indiana Global Economic Summit, record-breaking committed capital investment, first-ever electric vehicle battery facility investments (Samsung SDI/Stellantis and Samsung SD/GM), etc.
Keep (edit conflict) Actually I'd say this is a GNG pass, per NEXIST. Indepth, SIGCOV reliable sources, for example: Brad Chambers' company received 'bailout' from Indy after missing loan repayment deadline (Indy Star, April 25, 2024), Former Indiana Commerce Secretary Brad Chambers joins the crowded Republican race for governor (AP News, August 18, 2023), Chambers loans his gubernatorial campaign another $2 million (NWI Times, March 24, 2024), GOP Ind. governor hopeful donates to both parties (The Indianapolis Star August 29, 2023), Fishers Mayor: Brad Chambers is leader Indiana needs (Indianapolis Star, April 4, 2024). We need to be mindful about misapplying WP:ROUTINE; our job is ~~not to judge editorial content, our job is~~ to assess whether content is indepth and reliabale, not judge editorial decision making. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 02:25, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 05:50, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Edward J. Crawford

AfDs for this article:

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

This page was first deleted in 2019 and despite being a WP:REFBOMB this new incarnation shows no additional evidence of notability under GNG or NBIO. Coverage is in school publications; WP:TRADES publications like local business journals and magazines (and without feature-length coverage that would permit the use of trade pubs to establish notability); self-published sources; or WP:TRIVIALMENTIONs in longer lists of people. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:57, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Politicians, Military, Louisiana, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:08, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:51, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Comment This article is highly promotional. I began checking the citations and only got through the first section, but a number fail validation or are not reliable sources (e.g. something he himself wrote). As it is, I cannot (yet?) find anything that would make him noteworthy. It will take work to cut the article down to the actual reliable sources, and then to ones that are significantly about him. My gut feeling is that there will not be significant sources, but it will take some time to figure that out. Lamona (talk) 05:48, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Your assessment is incorrect. The 3 places you marked the page with [verification failed] were not accurate. 2 of the sources used this article, which you need to find his photo and click on it, and then a long bio will appear which verifies the info. Next you had an issue with source 11 freemannews.tulane.edu/, it partially verified the content, but the source 12, right after verifies everything. As far as being promotional, please feel free to revise it. Most of the article was written by me, but at least one other person has added to it. I am pretty certain that I didn't write anything promotional myself. Lionsonny (talk) 06:48, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Keep Plenty of coverage exists. Here are the good sources:

Forthworth Inc - This article has significant coverage on him.

Travel Talk - Long article on him and his family

Hawkins Crawford - Article about his wedding and has a bio about him and his wife.

Forthworth Business - A good long paragraph of bio on him

tulane.edu - Article about his Tedx Talk. It is short, but the fact that he did a Ted talk should help with notability.

Book: In the Warlords' Shadow - This book contains a few paragraphs of info on him.

Voyage Dallas: This is an interview, but there is 3 paragraphs of intro about him that is not an interview, hence it should count towards notability.

texas.gov - A long paragraph of bio on him

Peace Corps Connect - Click on his image and you will see a long bio on him.

Based on all the above, significant coverage exists and he meets notability guidelines. Lionsonny (talk) 06:21, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

@Lionsonny None of these sources is valid for establishing notability:

Fort Worth Inc is a WP:TRADES magazine, and only lengthy, in-depth features (not short news items like this one) from trade publications can be used to establish notability.
The "Travel Talk" article appears to be from a magazine called "University Park Life," which appears to be a real estate promotional product. (See example: https://issuu.com/daveperry-millerrealestate/docs/hea_carla_uplife_for_issuu). Furthermore, the PDF is hosted on the subject's own website! There is no way this can meet the standard of reliable and independent.
The wedding announcement can be used to verify facts but not to establish notability, since wedding announcements are generally supplied or based on data supplied by the couple and thus not independent.
Fort Worth Business - same trade publication issue noted above.
Tulane - source is not independent as it is his alma mater, plus it is a brief mention, not WP:SIGCOV
The book I cannot view, but if it's only a few paragraphs in a full book, that's unlikely to be considered significant coverage.
Voyage Dallas is an WP:INTERVIEW and thus a WP:PRIMARYSOURCE and ineligible to count toward notability.
Texas.gov is a WP:PRESSRELEASE and thus a primary source.
The Peace Corps site is a short official bio, not a long one, but either way not an independent or secondary source.

As I said when nominating, this is a WP:REFBOMB trying to create an illusion of notability through sheer volume of sources, but as I show here, none of them passes the bar of notability. Dclemens1971 (talk) 12:55, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

I'm going with Delete - due to lack of independent sources. The book has two nice paragraphs about him, but that is not enough to establish notability. The remainder are mainly local fluff pieces. The TedX talk does not establish notability - there have been hundreds/thousands of them and "TedX" is now a franchise. I find short bios that cannot be determined to be independent and a bunch of name checks. Although there are sources that state facts that are in the article, either they are not independent or are not sufficiently reliable. This person has done some interesting things so if a few reliable sources write significant and independent works about him, he could have a presence here. Lamona (talk) 16:31, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Keep. based on presented citations above by Lionsonny, this person will meet WP:GNG and WP:BIO. In particular, Forthworth Inc, Forthworth Business, Book: In the Warlords' Shadow, Peace Corps Connect and Voyage Dallas have good amount of coverage on him. Hkkingg (talk) 18:58, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The references presented by Lionsonny for GNG purposes have been disputed by two editors, and endorsed by another. Relisting for further analysis of these sources by other editors.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 03:23, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Michael Peters (media executive)

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

Fails WP:BIO and WP:JOURNALIST. Run of the mill coverage of this executive who used to run Euronews, but not much in terms of in-depth of independent from the subject (interviews, press releases) which would indicate this is a notable individual under our guidelines. Pilaz (talk) 14:50, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media and France. Pilaz (talk) 14:51, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Pilaz (talk) 15:15, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:51, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:45, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Keep. Meets WP:GNG. There is plenty of coverage in independent secondary sources – recent analysis of his leadership, including examination of recent controversies involving Euronews in this 2020 article in Arabian Business, for example. @Pilaz: Did you do a thorough search for coverage per WP:BEFORE before nominating? Worth checking Wikipedia Library and French and German sources as well. Even when you discount primary sources (originating from Africanews and Euronews) and Q&A interviews, there is easily enough to satisfy WP:BASIC. Also, I'm not sure WP:JOURNALIST even applies in the first place since he's a media exec, not a writer. Cielquiparle (talk) 09:48, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
Q&A interiews are usually not considered independent at AfD and are usually primary sources. See WP:INTERVIEW for a full explanation. I'd like to see WP:THREE, because the sum of everything I've come across does not seem to satisfy the GNG. Pilaz (talk) 16:47, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
The Arabian Business piece is also predominantly an interview, although I agree it does ask more critical questions that suggest fact-checking and analysis. Pilaz (talk) 16:55, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Comment Most of what I see are PR-type business articles, which aren't good for notability because they are promotional and usually not independent. The one article that seems to be about him is the Arabian Business one, but it will take more, IMO, to show that there is more than promotion going on. Lamona (talk) 05:22, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

There is literally so much coverage about him in multiple languages, that it will take a very long time to sort through. Just added a New York Times article that would at least help pass WP:BASIC. Will try to remember to come back to this later, but the point is, time and resources should be spent on searching for references and improving the article rather than just nominating for deletion without any WP:BEFORE. Conversely, it would be difficult for someone to aggregate every single piece of coverage about Michael Peters that exists and prove that it doesn't add up to at least WP:BASIC. Cielquiparle (talk) 06:03, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Included another article in which his career is being described. It was published by French newspaper Libération in 2012: https://www.liberation.fr/medias/2012/02/09/eurostar_794664/ Zamekrizeni (talk) 09:03, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

That NYT article has a one sentence quote from him; it is not about him at all and what he says in that article is not what is in the sentence (fails validation). The Liberation one is about him. I see that as possibly meeting GNG as there are two articles about him. As a BIO, though, we must be careful that all stated facts are from reliable sources. He was not mentioned on the about page for Africa news, and the remainder of that section is from a press release. I removed the about page and the facebook citation (not a reliable source). If those facts cannot be sourced the data should be removed from the article. If, as you say, there is "literally so much coverage" it should be possible to source those facts from a reliable source. (Yes, I know that AFD is not cleanup, but sometimes cleanup is needed to assess the article. Also, I can't help myself.)Lamona (talk) 15:03, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

I agree. The NYT piece only offers a brief quote, which is a passing mention and not independent, and the Libération article is an interview, so primary and not WP:INDEPENDENT. The suggestion that no BEFORE has been done is questionable (as a side note, this nomination was made as part of the NPP process), unless one significantly lowers the BIO bar to include material that is not in-depth, not independent, or not secondary. Pilaz (talk) 16:51, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Whatever. We can keep going and evaluate one article at a time, sure. Cielquiparle (talk) 21:36, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Ok, I have read all the comments more carefully now and think it's really great that everyone is engaged. Let's all get editing! Cielquiparle (talk) 22:30, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

I don't think that the Libération article is an interview. It contains some quotes of him, but I wouldn't consider it an interview. It is more of a profile or portrait, in my opinion Zamekrizeni (talk) 06:46, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Agree that the Liberation article counts towards notability per WP:GNG as it includes independent observations on the part of the journalist which put the quotes from Michael Peters himself into context. @Zamekrizeni If you are !voting to keep the article, start a new line and add "*Keep" (as I did above) and briefly explain which two or more articles you think count towards notability. The main notability guideline to reference is here WP:GNG (general notability guideline) and then the lower standard is WP:BASIC. Cielquiparle (talk) 08:05, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Unique Kings Obi

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

Fails WP:GNG or any related SNG. Sources are either passing mention, primary or not independent of the subject. The only sources that give SIGCOV are obviously promotional paid puffs and connected to the subject. The Vanguard piece [14], and the Independent pieces [15], [16] are examples. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 02:06, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Music, and Nigeria. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:06, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Keep: Subject is a notable figure in Nigeria and has enough sources to prove this. The passing mentions for were added to as an evidence to a sentence. The references about the African Creators Summit were also added to evidence the information that he is the founder of the summit Mevoelo (talk)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:10, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:00, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Keep - Per WP:NGRS these sources are considered generally reliable: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9. Vanguard is considered generally not reliable, but with all these subject would meet WP:BASIC.Hkkingg (talk) 08:24, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
If you consider this or this a good source, then I’m afraid you do not know what a good source that is suitable for Wikipedia is. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:06, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
delete: Per nomination above. ᗩvírαm7 • [@píng mє] 09:31, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
@Aviram7. Why is this a speedy delete? Which WP:CSD criteria does this meet? –Novem Linguae (talk) 02:28, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
Hey @Novem Linguae: Hello, I use XFD Partipcaition tool for vote on here, I simple tagged for delete but I don't known how add delete before speedy sentence, and I know all WP:AFD discussion who are currently open they will be closing after 1 Week and I fixed this issue. Happy editing!ᗩvírαm7 • [@píng mє] 05:25, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
Sounds good. Thanks for clarifying. –Novem Linguae (talk) 07:22, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
Below is source assessment of the sources cited in this article;

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table:
https://tribuneonlineng.com/unique-kings-obi-makes-it-top-5-list-of-talent-managers/	This is more or less a vanity list	Even though Nigerian Tribune is reliable per WP:NGRS, What's journalism without bylines?	~	✘ No
https://www.thisdaylive.com/index.php/2024/01/01/championing-collaboration-the-inspiration-behind-the-african-creators-academy/	This is obvious from reading the piece	Even though This Day is reliable per WP:NGRS,What's journalism without bylines?	This doesn't provide WP:SIGCOV on him, rather on "The African Creators Academy" which in itself is still really not a significant coverage	✘ No
https://www.pulse.ng/business/domestic/nigerian-creative-industry-launches-the-african-creators-summit/xgzd2dd	Pieces from "PULSE MIX" are usually promo puff, paid advertorials etc.	per WP:NGRS	Of course not, this is more or less a coverage on "African Creators Summit" and not Obi	✘ No
https://www.vanguardngr.com/2024/01/lasisi-unveils-as-host-for-african-creators-summit/#:~:text=The%20organizers%20of%20the%20African,January%2025th%20and%2026th%2C%202024.	I will not assess the independence of this source since it does not apply to Obi	~ Publication is marginally reliable per WP:NGRS, but this piece lacks a byline which renders the whole piece useless here on Wikipedia.	Just like Pulse Nigeria above	✘ No
https://www.vanguardngr.com/2024/01/meet-unique-kings-obi-talent-manager-digital-marketer/	Obvious paid advertorial, promotional puffery	Ditto		✘ No
https://www.thisdaylive.com/index.php/2023/04/08/the-future-of-the-nigerian-content-industry-a-conversation-with-unique-kings-obi/	This is an interview published in a way that makes it read like a news piece. The headline says it all "A Conversation With Unique Kings Obi". "When asked about", "Obi points out", etc.	Ditto	This is not WP:SIGCOV on Obi.	✘ No
https://guardian.ng/saturday-magazine/content-distribution-in-the-digital-age-unique-kings-obis-approach-to-reaching-global-audiences/	Promotional puffery and paid advertorial.	Promotional puffery and paid advertorial.	This is not WP:SIGCOV on Obi.	✘ No
https://tribuneonlineng.com/top-5-talent-managers-nurturing-success-in-entertainment-industry/	This is a duplicate publication by Nigerian Tribune that I assessed first, so, Ditto	Ditto	~ Ditto	✘ No
https://independent.ng/unique-kings-obi-paving-way-for-digital-talents-to-soar/	Promotional puffery and paid advertorial.	Promotional puffery and paid advertorial.	Promotional puffery and paid advertorial.	✘ No
https://www.premiumtimesng.com/entertainment/music/211256-okiemute-ighorodje-emerges-winner-mtn-project-fame.html?tztc=1	I am not going to assess this source as it is reliable but does not apply to Obi	Ditto	Ditto	✘ No
https://independent.ng/solvent-digital-moves-to-better-customer-service-relationships/	I am not going to assess this source as it does not apply to Obi	Ditto	Ditto	✘ No
https://techcabal.com/2024/01/19/african-creators-summit-2024-countdown-to-africas-foremost-creative-workshop/	Pieces by "Partner" from TechCabal" are usually sponsored/paid advertorials. In fact, this tells the whole story of all the sources used in this article.	Sponsored contents are not considered reliable	This is not WP:SIGCOV on Obi.	✘ No
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}}.

--Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:43, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+<noinclude>{{topic|Business}}
-{{Infobox Given Name Revised
+{{deletionlist|Business}}
-| name = Jared
+</noinclude>
-| image=
-| imagesize=
-| caption=
-| gender = Male
-| region =
-| origin = Hebrew
-| meaning = descent
-| related names = Jarod, Jered, Jerad, Jurd, Jarrod
-| footnotes =
-}}
+==[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Business|Business]]==
-{{For|the Biblical person with this name|Jared (ancestor of Noah)}}
+<!-- New AFDs should be placed on top of the list, directly below this line -->
-{{For|the Subway spokesman|Jared Fogle}}
+{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yoyo Records}}
+{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/O+K Research}}
+{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MedExpress Urgent Care}}
+{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kmuch Co.,Ltd.}}
+{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Loose Connection}}
+{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ValoreBooks.com}}
+{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FastAnt}}
+{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Capital Subscription Fund}}
+<!--
-'''Jared thinks obama is a niggar ''' is a proper name that is very common [[Given name|first name]] (in various Western countries) of [[Bible|Biblical]] derivation, [[Etymology|etymologically]] from the [[Hebrew language]], and one of the names by which [[Moses]] was known. [[Translation|Translated]] it means "descent" derived from [[Miriam]] who had "descended to the Nile" to find out what happened to her brother. In the Hebrew it is written ירד / יֶרֶד / יָרֶד, [[Pronunciation|pronounced]] yĕ\yā́-rĕḏ. When [[Transliteration|transliterated]] into the [[English language]], variations include Jared / Jaryd / Jarod / Jered / Jerad / Jurd (among other variations), being generally pronounced as dʒĕ-rĕd\rəd; according to classic Biblical pronunciation (denoted by [[Acute accent|syllabic stress accenting]]) it can be rendered dʒā\dʒē-rĕd. The name can be [[phonetic transcription|phonetically transcribed]] from Hebrew to English as Yared(h) / Yered(h) / Yored
+==Business Proposed deletions==
-(h).
+Please hide this entire section when empty
+-->
+{{Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Businesspeople}}
-== See also ==
-*{{lookfrom|Jared}}
-[[Category:Given names]]
-[[fr:Yared (Bible)]]
-[[he:ירד]]
-[[ja:ヤレド]]
-[[ru:Ерэд бен Маалал`эль]]
-{{given-name-stub}}