- 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 keep. Eddie891 Talk Work 15:18, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Kevin Patel ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Student activist fails WP:GNG. KidAd • SPEAK 18:54, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}}; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}}. |
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. ‡ Єl Cid of Valencia talk 18:59, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. ‡ Єl Cid of Valencia talk 18:59, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
- keep Sources in the article meet the GNG and the nom hasn't given any reason to discount them. The Men's Health and LA Times articles, for example, seem great. Hobit ( talk) 04:37, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 21:42, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 21:42, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TheChronium 11:44, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TheChronium 11:44, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 12:24, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
- Keep There's sufficient independent reliable sources with significant coverage to meet GNG
Source assessment table:
| ||||
| Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Voyage LA | ~ Interview | 
|
|
~ Partial |
| The Renewal Project | ~ Interview | ? Sponsored content |
|
? Unknown |
| GreenBiz |
|
|
|
✔ Yes |
| Vox |
|
|
|
✔ Yes |
| Men's Health |
|
|
|
✔ Yes |
| LA Times |
|
|
|
✔ Yes |
| In the Know (same as the Yahoo Finance link) |
|
|
|
✔ Yes |
| Datebook/SF Chronicle |
|
|
 passing mention
|
✘ No |
| Times Standard |
|
|
|
✔ Yes |
| Error: a source must be specified | ? Unknown | |||
| This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{ source assess table}}. | ||||
Clearly enough coverage in reliable sources to meet GNG Qwaiiplayer ( talk) 13:07, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
-
Comment: Just some caveats. The Times-Standard source is only a passing mention and the profile in GreenBiz doesn't really count as coverage. But everything else checks out. —
BriefEdits (
talk)
02:38, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
-
- Keep per Hobit and Qwaiiplayer's extensive assessment above. The article could certainly be improved. — Nizolan ( talk · c.) 13:43, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
- Keep We should keep this article and just delete the things that are not good. Don't delete the whole article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RiverSideSong ( talk • contribs) 03:19, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
- WE SHOULD KEEP THIS ARTICLE!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by RiverSideSong ( talk • contribs) 03:21, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
- Keep Can someone explain why this article is up for deletion? I don't see any issues on my end. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gildsons ( talk • contribs) 03:25, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
- Keep This article doesn't raise any red flags for me and is constant with other articles for youth climate activists, including Sophia Kianni and Kevin Mtai. There are some improvements to be made, but don't delete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sim-Marcel-Bilal ( talk • contribs) 03:29, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
- Keep WOW!! this is the most active I have seen Wikipedia in a while. Who is Kevin Patel? I just reviewed, this article is actually solid. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.105.46.252 ( talk) 03:33, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
- Keep kevin's a youth climate activist. The activity this is generating is sus, is it a race issue? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sim-Marcel-Bilal ( talk • contribs) 03:35, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
- Delete Let's not lie, we all know Wikipedia is racist. Kevin is just SOL at this point. Delete it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.105.46.252 ( talk) 03:46, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
- Keep Definitely a little biased but can be cleaned up a little bit. Keep. Kylerschin ( talk) 03:50, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
- Keep per the source assessment -- youth climate activists are covered in different ways than our typical "biography" pipeline, so the "activist" angle is something we need to keep an eye on, but that doesn't mean the articles are non-notable. Sadads ( talk) 12:14, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
- Keep, disregarding the extremely obvious brigading, Patel has received significant coverage in Vox and the LA Times, meaning that he passes GNG. Some of the other sources marked as green in the table above seem to be little more than passing mentions however. Devonian Wombat ( talk) 23:26, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
- Keep Qwaiiplayer's list shows that it passes WP:GNG. Article definitely could be cleaned up though. — BriefEdits ( talk) 05:05, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
- Keep No major faults found in the article, can be fixed by editing. Aloolkaparatha ( talk) 18:43, 7 June 2021 (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 keep. Eddie891 Talk Work 15:18, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Kevin Patel ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Student activist fails WP:GNG. KidAd • SPEAK 18:54, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
|
| If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}}; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}}. |
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. ‡ Єl Cid of Valencia talk 18:59, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. ‡ Єl Cid of Valencia talk 18:59, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
- keep Sources in the article meet the GNG and the nom hasn't given any reason to discount them. The Men's Health and LA Times articles, for example, seem great. Hobit ( talk) 04:37, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 21:42, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 21:42, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TheChronium 11:44, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TheChronium 11:44, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 12:24, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
- Keep There's sufficient independent reliable sources with significant coverage to meet GNG
Source assessment table:
| ||||
| Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Voyage LA | ~ Interview |
|
|
~ Partial |
| The Renewal Project | ~ Interview | ? Sponsored content |
|
? Unknown |
| GreenBiz |
|
|
|
✔ Yes |
| Vox |
|
|
|
✔ Yes |
| Men's Health |
|
|
|
✔ Yes |
| LA Times |
|
|
|
✔ Yes |
| In the Know (same as the Yahoo Finance link) |
|
|
|
✔ Yes |
| Datebook/SF Chronicle |
|
|
passing mention
|
✘ No |
| Times Standard |
|
|
|
✔ Yes |
| Error: a source must be specified | ? Unknown | |||
| This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{ source assess table}}. | ||||
Clearly enough coverage in reliable sources to meet GNG Qwaiiplayer ( talk) 13:07, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
-
Comment: Just some caveats. The Times-Standard source is only a passing mention and the profile in GreenBiz doesn't really count as coverage. But everything else checks out. —
BriefEdits (
talk)
02:38, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
-
- Keep per Hobit and Qwaiiplayer's extensive assessment above. The article could certainly be improved. — Nizolan ( talk · c.) 13:43, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
- Keep We should keep this article and just delete the things that are not good. Don't delete the whole article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RiverSideSong ( talk • contribs) 03:19, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
- WE SHOULD KEEP THIS ARTICLE!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by RiverSideSong ( talk • contribs) 03:21, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
- Keep Can someone explain why this article is up for deletion? I don't see any issues on my end. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gildsons ( talk • contribs) 03:25, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
- Keep This article doesn't raise any red flags for me and is constant with other articles for youth climate activists, including Sophia Kianni and Kevin Mtai. There are some improvements to be made, but don't delete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sim-Marcel-Bilal ( talk • contribs) 03:29, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
- Keep WOW!! this is the most active I have seen Wikipedia in a while. Who is Kevin Patel? I just reviewed, this article is actually solid. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.105.46.252 ( talk) 03:33, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
- Keep kevin's a youth climate activist. The activity this is generating is sus, is it a race issue? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sim-Marcel-Bilal ( talk • contribs) 03:35, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
- Delete Let's not lie, we all know Wikipedia is racist. Kevin is just SOL at this point. Delete it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.105.46.252 ( talk) 03:46, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
- Keep Definitely a little biased but can be cleaned up a little bit. Keep. Kylerschin ( talk) 03:50, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
- Keep per the source assessment -- youth climate activists are covered in different ways than our typical "biography" pipeline, so the "activist" angle is something we need to keep an eye on, but that doesn't mean the articles are non-notable. Sadads ( talk) 12:14, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
- Keep, disregarding the extremely obvious brigading, Patel has received significant coverage in Vox and the LA Times, meaning that he passes GNG. Some of the other sources marked as green in the table above seem to be little more than passing mentions however. Devonian Wombat ( talk) 23:26, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
- Keep Qwaiiplayer's list shows that it passes WP:GNG. Article definitely could be cleaned up though. — BriefEdits ( talk) 05:05, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
- Keep No major faults found in the article, can be fixed by editing. Aloolkaparatha ( talk) 18:43, 7 June 2021 (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.