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.
Not
notable. There is a lack of coverage about Mach in independent reliable sources. Whilst this article does have
many sources there is not enough about him as opposed to coverage of events he had involvment in.
duffbeerforme (
talk)
10:59, 25 February 2016 (UTC)reply
Oppose - This concern was raised and addressed in the last deletion suggestion. The subject is notable, the events are a primary reason for the notability.
Holzman-Tweed (
talk)
13:50, 25 February 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete at best and draft & userfy later if needed as my searches found nothing further convincing and the current article is still questionable for the applicable notability.
SwisterTwistertalk06:49, 1 March 2016 (UTC)reply
Comment, subject does not appear to meet
WP:BIO or
WP:ANYBIO as there he doesn't appear to be have significant coverage. However, the events that he is involved with may relate to no. 3 of
WP:CREATIVE ie. "3.The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews."
Coolabahapple (
talk)
07:29, 18 March 2016 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Not
notable. There is a lack of coverage about Mach in independent reliable sources. Whilst this article does have
many sources there is not enough about him as opposed to coverage of events he had involvment in.
duffbeerforme (
talk)
10:59, 25 February 2016 (UTC)reply
Oppose - This concern was raised and addressed in the last deletion suggestion. The subject is notable, the events are a primary reason for the notability.
Holzman-Tweed (
talk)
13:50, 25 February 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete at best and draft & userfy later if needed as my searches found nothing further convincing and the current article is still questionable for the applicable notability.
SwisterTwistertalk06:49, 1 March 2016 (UTC)reply
Comment, subject does not appear to meet
WP:BIO or
WP:ANYBIO as there he doesn't appear to be have significant coverage. However, the events that he is involved with may relate to no. 3 of
WP:CREATIVE ie. "3.The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews."
Coolabahapple (
talk)
07:29, 18 March 2016 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.