From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. plicit 23:21, 25 October 2023 (UTC) reply

Rudy Poat

Rudy Poat (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:BIO, WP:SIGCOV. Terrible references. No coverage at all apart from single interview. UPE scope_creep Talk 09:25, 17 October 2023 (UTC) reply

Unless there is WP:SECONDARY coverage, people talking to other people about the subject but who don't know the subject. That is gold standard. So in this case, no. The subject fails WP:BIO. There is zero coverage, not even enought to reach WP:THREE which by consensus is considered best practice, to prove the person notable. scope_creep Talk 09:17, 24 October 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 13:53, 24 October 2023 (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.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. plicit 23:21, 25 October 2023 (UTC) reply

Rudy Poat

Rudy Poat (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:BIO, WP:SIGCOV. Terrible references. No coverage at all apart from single interview. UPE scope_creep Talk 09:25, 17 October 2023 (UTC) reply

Unless there is WP:SECONDARY coverage, people talking to other people about the subject but who don't know the subject. That is gold standard. So in this case, no. The subject fails WP:BIO. There is zero coverage, not even enought to reach WP:THREE which by consensus is considered best practice, to prove the person notable. scope_creep Talk 09:17, 24 October 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 13:53, 24 October 2023 (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.

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook