The result was delete. Closing as keep by strength of arguments, particularly as created by blocked sock. There are strong notability concerns. I see one strong argument for keep from a clearly uninvolved editor, but there are more numerous and stronger arguments for delete, so I so judge consensus. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 02:56, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
Non-notable businessman with questionable sourcing and awards, likely UPE/potential socking. I'd have draftified, but the draft was just redirected to this article. Star Mississippi 03:54, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 03:56, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 03:32, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. I don't see consensus here and I have doubts about low edit accounts that show up at random AFDs to comment. I don't discount their opinions but, like I said, I have my doubts.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 03:47, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
These references are typical of entrepreneur coverage for a UPE article. There is a several interviews which are WP:PRIMARY, the PR coverage is non-rs as its not reliable and the profiles are non-rs as well as they not significant. It fails WP:SIGCOV. There is not a single WP:SECONDARY source amongst this first block, where is should be. scope_creep Talk 09:29, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
*Keep. Per above by CT55555, the subject meets
WP:BASIC.
TheGrandSon (
talk) 09:36, 13 February 2023 (UTC) sock blocked.
Star
Mississippi 15:45, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
The result was delete. Closing as keep by strength of arguments, particularly as created by blocked sock. There are strong notability concerns. I see one strong argument for keep from a clearly uninvolved editor, but there are more numerous and stronger arguments for delete, so I so judge consensus. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 02:56, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
Non-notable businessman with questionable sourcing and awards, likely UPE/potential socking. I'd have draftified, but the draft was just redirected to this article. Star Mississippi 03:54, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 03:56, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 03:32, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. I don't see consensus here and I have doubts about low edit accounts that show up at random AFDs to comment. I don't discount their opinions but, like I said, I have my doubts.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 03:47, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
These references are typical of entrepreneur coverage for a UPE article. There is a several interviews which are WP:PRIMARY, the PR coverage is non-rs as its not reliable and the profiles are non-rs as well as they not significant. It fails WP:SIGCOV. There is not a single WP:SECONDARY source amongst this first block, where is should be. scope_creep Talk 09:29, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
*Keep. Per above by CT55555, the subject meets
WP:BASIC.
TheGrandSon (
talk) 09:36, 13 February 2023 (UTC) sock blocked.
Star
Mississippi 15:45, 15 February 2023 (UTC)