Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Businesspeople

WP:DSBOSS

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Businesspeople. 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:

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|Businesspeople|~~~~}} 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.

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 other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Businesspeople. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

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

This list is included in more general lists of business-related deletions and people for deletion.

Businesspeople

Atul (company)

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

Fails WP:CORP and WP:GNG, no significant independent coverage in reliable sources & most important article is promotional in tone. Chronos.Zx (talk) 02:07, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Business, China, United Arab Emirates, India, Gujarat, Brazil, and United States of America. Chronos.Zx (talk) 02:07, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph P. Buckley

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

Fails WP:BIO. All I could find is a Temple Law Review bio. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:58, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Law, Police, and Illinois. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:19, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lindsay Merrithew

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

Fails WP:NACTOR and WP:NBUSINESSPERSON. His film and TV credits are not particularly significant and his company is unnotable. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:09, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Businesspeople, Television, Theatre, Health and fitness, and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:17, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Steve Fanger

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

Fails WP:GNG, WP:NMUSICIAN and WP:NBUSINESSPERSON. He played in obscure article-less bands and founded a "local removals company". Clarityfiend (talk) 00:14, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Businesspeople, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:16, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Trevor Blake (entrepreneur)

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

This article was flagged a few years back for questionable notability, and since then no major improvement has taken place to demonstrate the subject meets the criteria. I have the following concerns:

I have been unable to verify the claim that he sold a company for upwards of $100 million (in other places, the claim is various companies for $300 million)
While his book has numerous ratings, I cannot locate reviews in major publications, just blogs. The Huffington Post story referenced in this article was written by Blake himself.
The article is overly reliant on primary sources, and I couldn't find significant secondary source coverage. The closest thing was a brief 2012 Forbes online article written by a fellow entrepreneur/self help type (see here) and a story in a regional newspaper in Wales describing his 'rags to riches' life story. I also checked the archived version of his website (current one isn't working for me, or the website of his most recent venture for that matter) and could not his verify his claim that his book had been profiled by the Wall Street Journal.

Addendum - This isn't strictly related to the question of notability, but further research of the article subject doesn't do much to discourage my impression this is an article (in its current form at least) there for promotional purposes and that the prowess of Blake as an entrepreneur may be exaggerated. Further detail: this donor profile of Blake has some questionable statements that raised an eyebrow, notably that he was one of only 6 recruits to graduate from his class of 200 at Britannia Royal Naval College (an utterly absurd claim) and that he has signed a deal to turn his first book into a movie. Leonstojka (talk) 17:23, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Businesspeople. Leonstojka (talk) 17:23, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:26, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No SIGCOV, WP:NBIO or WP:GNG aren't met. Only primary sources in the article. I did find a mentions on a couple of business news sites, which doesn't seem reliable enough. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 18:31, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: not a major player with enough coverage. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 23:32, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - if not spam, why does it look like that? Subject has a documented history of extraordinary claims without commensurate evidence. Bearian (talk) 01:12, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stacey Gabriel (actress)

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

This article does not meet WP:GNG. There is no evidence of significant, independent coverage from reliable sources to establish a lasting impact in the field. Most references appear to be minor news snippets, social media, or self-published material, which do not qualify as substantial verification under Wikipedia's standards. Without additional, credible sources demonstrating notable achievements or career recognition. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 13:33, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Businesspeople, Lists of people, Business, Philippines, and Spain. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 13:33, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your claims are demonstrably false. Reverse this unjustified nomination for deletion. You have claimed multiple falsehoods which are against the Community Guidelines of Wikipedia.

To clarify:

List of nationally and internationally distributed news organizations referenced in the article:

- The Inquirer.net

- The Philippine Star

- ABS-CBN News

- the Manila Bulletin

- Mega magazine

- Philstar.com

- PEP. Ph

All sources explicitly note Stacey Gabriel and her notable activities.

---

Meanwhile your claims of "self published" material being used is false. Note an example of it or kindly retract your false claim. If you cannot back up this claim, nor retract it, your submission will be flagged as an abuse of Wikipedia policy.

---

"Without additional, credible sources demonstrating notable achievements or career recognition"

Multiple independent sources outline dozens of TV series episodes Stacey participated in, as well as her participation and placing 1st Runner-Up in the 2024 Miss Universe Philippines competition are noted. This is in addition to her success in the national Binibining Pilipinas pageant.

Are these not notable?

---

"social media"

There are no social media references in this article.

---

Given no evidence to support this unjustified action, reverse this flagrantly unjustified and deceptive nomination for deletion. Mickfir (talk) 16:57, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dear @Mickfir,

I want to clarify that the nomination was made in good faith, based on a review of the article’s current sourcing and in line with WP:GNG and WP:BIO some of the listed sources are reliable, and this Afd only for english version. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 17:05, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why include false claims that social media and self published material was used as references? There is not a single referenced source that was self published nor any reference to social media. This is a harmful oversight at best and deliberately deceptive at worst.

As for notability... I repeat, dozens of interdependently verified TV Episode performances and multiple national pageants including Miss Universe Philippines as 1st Runner-up. Mickfir (talk) 17:15, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Let me check! WP:AFD is not only for deletion it's a basic procedure to determine whether an article is suitable for Wikipedia. Many contributors will review it and vote, so there's no need to panic just let the contributors decide.𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 17:16, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Let me check" ? You nominated this article for deletion without even checking if the claims you are making against it are true?

Perhaps this article is worth a read: Wikipedia:Don't lie

"basic procedure to determine whether an article is suitable for Wikipedia"

No. Wikipedia best practice clearly indicates that if an article has areas for improvement, the 'Talk' page should be used to suggest edits, or you make the edits yourself.

Nominating an article for deletion based on false claims is a flagrant abuse of Wikipedia recommended practice. Mickfir (talk) 10:28, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:34, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Sources like ABS-CBN News, The Philippine Star, Manila Bulletin, and others mentioned by Mickfir are reliable. But some, like IMDb, aren't and should be removed. — doclys (❀) 18:32, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jill Barrow

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

1. Chief Executives of County Councils don't seem to be inherently notable, as opposed to say, an elected politician serving as council leader.

2. The article resembles a pseudo-biography, as much of the content is dominated by an event/controversy that could be restricted to either the article on Lincolnshire County Council or Jim Speechley.

3. I was unable to locate significant secondary source coverage of the subject (all the hits revolved around the story at the heart of the article), and the career details in the article rely on a Who's Who entry. Leonstojka (talk) 09:51, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Leonstojka (talk) 09:51, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 10:26, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dashgin Iskandarov

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

Not a notable person. Don't have any WP:SIGCOV, no credible academic profile to be found. Yousiphh (talk) 09:39, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Azerbaijan. Shellwood (talk) 10:26, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per the nom the subject does not have any notable coverage to sustain the article Scooby453w (talk) 11:56, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete. No significant coverage, passing mentions at best. Leonstojka (talk) 16:23, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dilip Modi

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

The sources include bio pages, sponsored articles, and primary sources. The articles from Medianama and Business Standard clearly state at the end that they are sponsored. I also tried to find significant coverage from independent, reliable sources but couldn’t find any. GrabUp - Talk 08:38, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and India. Shellwood (talk) 10:23, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Richard C. Seaver

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

As Sdkb and I discussed on article talk page, the only element of SIGCOV is the LA Times obit. While that might suggest that there is more coverage, searches on google/newspapers.com have not turned up any more, so we don't have GNG met here. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 09:46, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and California. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 09:46, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can only find his name in an article about the company [1]. Still not enough sourcing to show notability. Oaktree b (talk) 14:10, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Frank Seaver, an article about his uncle and his uncle's company (WP:ATD-R), where I added the references from this article. "One sentence does not an article make." This source demonstrates how the subject was overshadowed by his uncle in regards to the Hydril Company, and therefore redirecting something like this is a common solution. Yes, the subject is a member of a prominent Southern California family, which was connected to an even more prominent Californian, Edward L. Doheny; however, even Doheny's children are not blue-linked in his article. The Daily Bulletin article is overwhelmingly about Frank; the Los Angeles Times obituary which mentions the subject's philanthropy of the arts (it's in the arts section), although different from a regular paid notice is still not enough to justify a dedicated article, per WP:GNG. I'm finding many passing mentions of the subject in connection with him chairing various fundraisers and sitting on committees (sometimes ones chaired by his aunt). However, I fail to see how any of this warrants a standalone article (stub). See also WP:PHILANTHROPIST, which advises against attaching this label to anyone who ever donated a substantial amount of money to a cause. StonyBrook _babble 22:01, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Elissa_Shevinsky

AfDs for this article:

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

Notability has not been established for this person. Page was previously nominated for deletion Barrettsprivateers (talk) 23:22, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Businesspeople, Women, Computing, Massachusetts, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:17, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - the previous AfD discussion was closed in 2013, so that was a while back. There is news coverage on Shevinsky that post-dates the previous discussion. DaffodilOcean (talk) 20:36, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Voting for delete due to lack of notability. Research indicates that the subject does not have a reputation amongst her peers— Preceding unsigned comment added by Barrettsprivateers (talk • contribs) 21:02, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your nomination is already a vote. REAL_MOUSE_IRL talk 11:26, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I have done a bit of tidying up and removed the poorly-cited, resume-like items to focus on news coverage of Shevinsky. The best three sources (all in the article) are a 2014 New York Times article [2], and 2015 CNN article [3], and her coverage in a 2014 book by Dan Shapiro [4]. In addition, she has been widely quoted in the news talking about sexism in the tech industry (see examples in the article). DaffodilOcean (talk) 14:47, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The article is a bit better written after that clean up, but she is still not notable by WP:GNG guidelines. Go4thProsper (talk) 01:27, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Leitz

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

It looks like none of the sources cited are independent coverage of the subject. Mostly interviews, press releases, company profiles, and even articles written by him. So many of the links are dead that I suspect this was written by Gen AI. Additionally, I found zero hits in Swiss newspaper sources of any kind, which is quite remarkable (in a bad way). Toadspike [Talk] 19:17, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Finance, Switzerland, California, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:42, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can only find sources from Business Wire, which are press releases. Source 10 in the article is the only RS and the rest aren't helpful (and #10 isn't enough for sourcing). Even on .ch websites, not much of anything comes up. Oaktree b (talk) 21:24, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Response to Article Concerns

Source Independence and Coverage

The article has been updated to address concerns about source reliability. Dead links have been removed, press releases and company-generated content have been eliminated, and independent third-party sources have been added. These now include reputable outlets such as Forbes, Australian Financial Review, IntraFish, Fundview, MOI Global, Basel Area, and Guy Spier.

Swiss Media Coverage

The limited coverage in mainstream Swiss media likely reflects the niche nature of iolite Capital and its international investment focus. As a boutique firm, its activities are more frequently covered in specialized financial and industry publications. Investments such as Bakkafrost and Jumbo Interactive have been covered in respected international outlets. Local acknowledgment is reflected in sources like Basel Area and Fundview.

AI-Generated Content Suspicion

The perception that the article may be AI-generated seems to have been driven by previously listed dead or weak sources. These have now been removed or replaced with active, verifiable, and reputable references. Itsallabout42 (talk) 07:54, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How ironic that a comment that mentions a "perception that the article may be AI-generated" was itself written by AI. Delete per Oaktree. Black Kite (talk) 11:06, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate the feedback, but would like to clarify a few points:

Several points raised in the deletion rationale are factually incorrect:

a) "None of the sources are independent coverage of the subject" – False. The article cites multiple independent, third-party sources including Forbes, Australian Financial Review, IntraFish, Fundview, MOI Global, and commentary by Guy Spier. These are neither affiliated with the subject nor promotional in nature.

b) "Dead links" – Incorrect. All current references were tested and are functional. If any previous links were broken, they’ve been replaced with live, verifiable sources.

c) "Zero hits in Swiss newspaper sources of any kind" – Misleading. While Swiss national media may not have covered the subject in depth, this reflects the niche, international nature of Robert and his firm, not a lack of notability. Additionally, there is Swiss coverage, including Basel Area Business & Innovation (a recognized regional economic development agency) and Zefix (the official Swiss commercial registry).

d) "Only sources from Business Wire" – False. No sources from Business Wire are cited. All sources are editorial or institutional publications, not press release aggregators.

e) "Only one source is helpful" – Subjective. At least five sources provide substantial, independent insight into the subject’s professional background and activities. These meet Wikipedia’s criteria for reliable, verifiable, secondary coverage — including Forbes, Fundview, and MOI Global. It’s not nothing.

f) "The article was written by AI" – Mischaracterization. The article was manually written, with language refinement via AI tools due to the contributor’s non-native English. Content selection, structure, and sourcing were entirely human-led.

Full disclosure: I am also using AI to smooth the language of this feedback given I am a non-native speaker. However, the essence of the feedback provided is clearly my own - as is the article. Itsallabout42 (talk) 15:29, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the feedback, but would like to clarify a few points.
Several points raised in the deletion rationale are factually incorrect:
- "None of the sources are independent coverage of the subject" – False. The article cites multiple independent, third-party sources including Forbes, Australian Financial Review, IntraFish, Fundview, MOI Global, and commentary by Guy Spier. These are neither affiliated with the subject nor promotional in nature.
- "Dead links" – Incorrect. All current references were tested and are functional. If any previous links were broken, they’ve been replaced with live, verifiable sources.
- "Zero hits in Swiss newspaper sources of any kind" – Misleading. While Swiss national media may not have covered the subject in depth, this reflects the niche, international nature of Robert and his firm, not a lack of notability. Additionally, there is Swiss coverage, including Basel Area Business & Innovation (a recognized regional economic development agency) and Zefix (the official Swiss commercial registry).
- "Only sources from Business Wire" – False. No sources from Business Wire are cited. All sources are editorial or institutional publications, not press release aggregators.
- "Only one source is helpful" – Subjective. At least five sources provide substantial, independent insight into the subject’s professional background and activities. These meet Wikipedia’s criteria for reliable, verifiable, secondary coverage — including Forbes, Fundview, and MOI Global. It’s not nothing.
- "The article was written by AI" – Mischaracterization. The article was manually written, with language refinement via AI tools due to the contributor’s non-native English. Content selection, structure, and sourcing were entirely human-led.
Full disclosure: I am also using AI to smooth the language of this feedback given I am a non-native speaker. However, the essence of the feedback provided is clearly my own - as is the article. Itsallabout42 (talk) 15:49, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. AI-generated nonsense sourced mostly to company profiles and interviews. The only two decent sources (in Reuters and the Australian Financial Review) don't even mention him. Couldn't find anything else to suggest notability. MCE89 (talk) 11:26, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Respectfully, your comment contains several factual errors:

Not AI-generated nonsense – The article was manually written. Language was refined using AI tools due to my being a non-native English speaker, but the content, structure, and sources were all human-curated.

Not “mostly company profiles and interviews” – The article cites multiple independent, third-party sources that are not affiliated with the subject, including: Forbes, Australian Financial Review, IntraFish, Fundview, Value Walk, MOI Global, Commentary by Guy Spier (a recognized value investor).
"Nothing else to suggest notability” – The subject is the founder of an international investment firm active for over a decade, with investments and commentary cited in credible financial and industry-specific outlets. His fund is among the largest shareholders in a variety of companies and is actively engaged in shareholder activism — including public campaigns and governance reform efforts in Canada and Australia. That may not warrant a front-page profile, but it clearly crosses the notability threshold. Itsallabout42 (talk) 15:37, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Of the six "independent, third-party sources" you mention:
Forbes: see WP:FORBESCON, plus this is an interview and therefore not independent of the subject

AFR: article doesn't mention Robert Leitz at all

IntraFish: no byline, probably sponsored content, also just repeats the aforementioned FORBESCON interview

Fundview: promotional and mostly quotes from Leitz

MOI Global: these are an article and a presentation by Leitz, not secondary coverage of him

Guy Spier: passing mention, also says that Leitz is an investor in the author's fund and is therefore not independent
None of these meet the requirement of being significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Please familiarise yourself with Wikipedia's notability guidelines for people, which I do not see any indication that Robert Leitz meets. MCE89 (talk) 15:50, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Respectfully, your comment contains several factual errors:
- Not AI-generated nonsense – The article was manually written. Language was refined using AI tools due to my being a non-native English speaker, but the content, structure, and sources were all human-curated.
- Not “mostly company profiles and interviews” – The article cites multiple independent, third-party sources that are not affiliated with the subject, including: Forbes, Australian Financial Review, IntraFish, Fundview, Value Walk, MOI Global, Commentary by Guy Spier (a recognized value investor).
- "Nothing else to suggest notability” – The subject is the founder of an international investment firm active for over a decade, with investments and commentary cited in credible financial and industry-specific outlets. His fund is among the largest shareholders in a variety of companies and is actively engaged in shareholder activism — including public campaigns and governance reform efforts in Canada and Australia. That may not warrant a front-page profile, but it clearly crosses the notability threshold.
Itsallabout42 (talk) 15:48, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Sluice out the AI-generated crap (courtesy of now-indeffed Itsallabout42), and there's no actual there there. No evidence that the subject meets WP:SIGCOV, obvious WP:PROMO violation is obvious. Ravenswing 21:20, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per above. I especially need to point out that the sourcing is terrible. Forbes is the poster child for formerly respected media that has gone down the drain. Bearian (talk) 00:31, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This is an easy call, as noted by the earlier comments. The subsequent response was inadequate and unsatisfactory. Not notable. Delete. Go4thProsper (talk) 01:51, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Majid Azami

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

None of the RS independent sources mention the subject. Googling does not indicate notability Czarking0 (talk) 16:23, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Iran. Shellwood (talk) 16:48, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
strongly oppose. He is a highly influential figure in Iran, serving as the CEO of Jey Oil Refining Company and as Deputy Chairman, Managing Director, and Board Member of Sepehr Energy Jahan Nama Pars Company (Sepehr Energy). These companies are significant players in Iran's oil industry, with a combined value of several hundred million dollars (if not more). His role and impact in the business sector are substantial, making him a notable figure deserving of an article.

Additionally, it is worth noting that Majid Azami was sanctioned by the U.S. Department of the Treasury on November 29, 2023, under Executive Order 13224, for facilitating oil sales on behalf of Iran's Armed Forces General Staff. This action underscores his influence and the international attention his activities have received.

I have already added numerous reliable and independent sources in English, Persian, and French that clearly establish his notability. These include news articles and business reports that detail his professional achievements and leadership position. Razgura (talk) 17:14, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

comment @Razgura: has added a number of sources to the article. I do not see them at WP:RSP and would like some clarity on their reliability / ability to establish notability. It will take some non-English investigation to determine significant coverage. These are in order of the ref on the article. He is mentioned a lot of these sources seem to mostly report things he said about oil industry not himself.

kountrass.com - There does not appear to be article content just a photo of the subject ?
https://irannewsdaily.com - no sig cov
Iran News Daily - no sig cov
eghtesadonline - no sig cov
azernews - no sig cov
mehrnews - no sig cov

Czarking0 (talk) 01:16, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Majid Azami is a well-known and influential figure in Iran, serving in top executive roles at major oil companies such as Jey Oil and Sepehr Energy. The focus on U.S. sanctions may be disproportionate—while notable, they only highlight his international relevance. The article should be improved, not deleted, and efforts should be made to find a freely licensed photo. there are many images of him in Persian language sources, and it’s worth trying to secure one under a free license. AghaJhonson (talk) 10:31, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please provide a link to a reliable Persian language source that gives him significant coverage? Czarking0 (talk) 18:22, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Czarking0 I encourage you to read the most recent investigative report on Majid Azami, published by Iran International on May 8, 2025: https://www.iranintl.com/202505082419. The article presents substantial independent coverage, documenting his central role in Iran’s oil export system through front companies linked to the Armed Forces General Staff. Additionally, as supported by English-language sources cited in the article, Azami has received sustained media coverage since at least 2017, notably during his tenure as CEO of Jey Oil Company—the largest bitumen producer in the Middle East and a major state-owned enterprise.

His inclusion in the U.S. Treasury Department’s SDN sanctions list, alongside Sepehr Energy Jahan-Nama Pars, further reflects his international prominence and the geopolitical relevance of his activities. This combination of long-term leadership, institutional significance, and international scrutiny clearly meets the threshold of notability.

Note: I used GPT to assist with translation and phrasing of this comment. Razgura (talk) 11:45, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the article. I would consider this significant coverage. If there is a second sigcov source then I would also oppose deletion. FYI since you have repeated this multiple times, being a target of sanctions is not in the guidelines for establishing notability. WP:N Czarking0 (talk) 15:00, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mentions of him in an official capacity indicating notability:

Razgura (talk) 18:42, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see that Iran International is not listed at WP:RSP nor is it on the news list at Portal:Iran. Can you give evidence of the reliability of this source? Czarking0 (talk) 15:10, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I didn’t see many Iranian news websites on this list (aside from Tasnim News Agency and Press TV).

As for Iran International, you can read about it on Wikipedia... I recommend reading the article on Persian Wikipedia, where it is marked as a "Good article" (it might be another article I’ll consider improving here in English in the future).

The channel claims to maintain independent editorial practices and operates according to high journalistic standards: accuracy, credibility, transparency, and fairness. Its official website outlines editorial guidelines that emphasize a commitment to objectivity and journalistic independence (see here: https://www.iranintl.com/en/guidelinesen).

Its reporting is frequently cited by international media outlets, including the BBC, The Guardian, and The Independent, which suggests a certain degree of international recognition and functional credibility. (All of this is also detailed in the Wikipedia article) Razgura (talk) 18:11, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In your opinion are there any red flags regarding Iran International as a reliable source? Czarking0 (talk) 19:51, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's a tough question, there is no truly objective media outlet in Iran. As you can see in my previous comment, he is mentioned across different types of media sources.Razgura (talk) 20:04, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

google translating the Persian WP page you sent:

"Iran International does not broadcast advertising and is not transparent about its funding, which has raised doubts about the network's editorial independence "
"According to Eskandar Sadeghi Boroujerdi, a postdoctoral researcher on modern Iranian history at Oxford University , “Iran International appears to be an essential part of Prince bin Salman’s agenda to adopt a hostile approach towards Iran"
"According to Haaretz , Mossad uses Iran International as a base to leak information"

Not exactly a stellar review. Overall I think the source can be used but it is not really green light reliable source Czarking0 (talk) 22:02, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Naveen Singh Suhag

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

Subject does not meet GNG. The sources are mostly not independent (press releases, interviews, a paper written by the subject, company profiles). The ToI article [5] might be sigcov of a company he founded, but the only parts about the subject are quotes from him. This [6] contains a four-sentence mention but really isn't focused on him. The only information I can find in Swiss media is that a person with his exact full name seems to have opened a Subway sandwich store in Langenthal, but the coverage all comes from one source (Berner Zeitung) and is mostly quotes. There are also two hits for his name in reports on judo competitions, far from sigcov. Toadspike [Talk] 15:21, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, India, and Switzerland. Shellwood (talk) 15:24, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Wrestling. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:55, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete not notable. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 19:36, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It is not meeting notability guidelines, needs to be deleted.Almandavi (talk) 05:39, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Allin Kempthorne

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

I've AFD'd this, but actually I think it should be redirected to Wriggler (video game). There doesn't appear to be any independent, reliable sources giving significant coverage to the subject of this article. Sourcing is all tabloid news (The Mirror, The Sun, Metro) or passing mentions. Simply appearing on BGT (and not being recognised...) does not indicate notability. Simply being a bit-part actor in numerous films does not indicate notability. Additionally I have WP:PROMO/WP:COI concerns here.

They wrote the ZX Spectrum game Wriggler together with their twin when they were at school, and this game is clearly notable, but nothing else they have done appears to be notable.

Also nominating The Vampires of Bloody Island for deletion (no need to redirect this), which is the film Allin Kempthorne created. The only coverage that could be found for this is blatantly promotional ("we were forced to bring forward the release of this film because of an email campaign that no-one but us is the source for existing") and from sources of dubious reliability. Simply being nominated for a Twitter Shorty Award does not indicate notability.

Similarly also Learning Hebrew for the same reasons.FOARP (talk) 07:22, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Artists, Businesspeople, and Video games. FOARP (talk) 07:22, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Magic, Television, Entertainment, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

John Robitaille

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

Businessman and onetime political candidate. I don't see an argument for him being notable. I couldn't find any news coverage of him from the last 15 years. There were some articles from November 2024 about a candy store owned by a John Robitaille, but that store was in California, so I doubt it's the same person. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 20:39, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Politicians, and Rhode Island. Shellwood (talk) 22:02, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I remember this candidate. He was up and coming. 2010 was the year the Republicans snatched defeat from victory. I'm not sure if it should be merged or redirected to the election article, in lieu of deleting, which I think would be a bad outcome. Discuss. Bearian (talk) 20:51, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew C. Jacobson

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

Businessman and onetime political candidate whose main claim to fame is that he used to lead a nonprofit that doesn't have a Wikipedia page. I can't find any news coverage of him since his 2010 campaign, not that he ever really received any in-depth coverage to begin with. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 20:43, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Maine. Shellwood (talk) 22:01, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:05, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - for a BLP, there is an awfully lot of information that isn't sourced is is poorly sourced. Bearian (talk) 20:48, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:GNG. No significant coverage to establish notability. Frank Ken (talk) 11:02, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Poorly sourced promotion article, no evidence of significant coverage. Leonstojka (talk) 13:28, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

James Arkell (disambiguation)

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

2/3 of the people listed here do not have an article of their own, and thus do not meet notability standards. Gommeh ➡️ Talk to me 20:52, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Politicians, Lists of people, and Disambiguations. Gommeh ➡️ Talk to me 20:52, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. One entry, the father of a notable person, IMO fails WP:DABMENTION, which means that WP:TWODABS applies. Clarityfiend (talk) 10:36, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ernest L. Cu

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

The page is too promotional, with no independent reliable references. I found only company media references, several interviews and brief mentions (so called WP Routine, WP Trades). Norlk (talk) 15:37, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Philippines. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:30, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance and Technology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:00, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. How do you spell "Promo?" Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 22:32, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete because we are not social media site. I'd redirect but I want to discourage promotional autobiography from taking up any space. FWIW, my partner is Pinoy. Bearian (talk) 21:10, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Wilkinson-Smith

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

Clearly promotional BLP filled with puffery. The only indication of notability is the article's assertion that the subject was appointed to a quasi-governmental office of "crown solicitor". The position is of so little notability that we don't have an article on it; and regardless, the cited source only states that the article's subject was briefly acting in the role and did not formally hold it. Dan Leonard (talk • contribs) 18:14, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Politicians, and New Zealand. Dan Leonard (talk • contribs) 18:14, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:32, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. More puffery than a plate of puffed pastries. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 22:27, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per above - we are not LinkedIn - but I note that he was "president of the Criminal Bar Association" (which one?). Bearian (talk) 20:55, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:GNG. Frank Ken (talk) 11:32, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Just to note a Crown Solicitor is a private lawyer hired by the Crown for prosecutions. Traumnovelle (talk) 21:54, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Crystal Williams (cosmetologist)

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

Subject does not appear to be notable per WP:GNG. Many of the references in the article do not seem to be independent of the subject, and upon search, it does not seem like this subject is notable. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 17:32, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, and Illinois. Shellwood (talk) 18:05, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. At first I thought it was about a cosmologist. But no, must deleter. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 22:29, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Julian Adyeri Omalla

AfDs for this article:

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

The person is not notable businessperson; the awards are not notable either. I cannot find proper third party reliable of the subject references. Seems the journalists are not very interested in this topic. Norlk (talk) 15:49, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

UN link looks "good" but when you click on it and read it gives an interview format coverage, not reliable and not suitable for BLP:

https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/06/1093392

Julian Omalla, who is widely known as “Mama Cheers” after the popular juice brand “Cheers” that her company Delight Uganda produces, is now planning to expand with the construction of a new factory in the north of the country.

“When I launched my company, Delight Uganda Limited, in 1996, I didn’t know much about running a business. I started it from scratch, and had to overcome many challenges.

I remember walking for many kilometres, on bad roads, and working in my garden from morning to night. One of the low points came when my business partner ran off with all of the money I had raised to buy stock. All I had left was a wheelbarrow, to take fruit to market, and one red dress!

I couldn’t get any banks to finance my business, because I didn’t have any collateral, so raising funds to expand was an uphill task. Like most women in Uganda, I had to rely on savings and invest my profits back into the company.

This link https://unctad.org/news/prize-winning-ugandan-woman-entrepreneur-grows-juice-business-improves-community provides no significant coverage either, and neither this one https://observer.ug/business/julian-omalla-wins-un-award-for-inclusive-business-model/

Omalla thanked Enterprise Uganda and UNCTAD for the award, and pledged to continue working to support uplift rural women from poverty.

She said that she intends to reach at least one million women from the current 500,000, over the next 10 years. She also noted that Delight is in the process of installing a modern processing plant in the region so as to increase its capacity to be able to buy and process all the fruits produced by women farmers. Norlk (talk) 15:54, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

...So is this a keep or delete, @Norlk ? Sanemero the Robot Prince (not really, it's a Gloryhammer reference) 16:39, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, and Uganda. Shellwood (talk) 16:31, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: There plenty of sources about her including couple of articles in New Vision (1, 2) and Daily Monitor (1, 2, 3)which are respected publications in Uganda. Also not sure why we suddenly think UN News is not reliable. FuzzyMagma (talk) 16:01, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: this page was previously nominated for deletion, and passed/kept. What is the new claim with the current nom? FuzzyMagma (talk) 17:19, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jonathan Baer

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

Non-notable businessperson that fails WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO. Mekomo (talk) 06:39, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Pennsylvania. Shellwood (talk) 10:09, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Livejournal and vocal.media are self-published sources, cannot be used to demonstrate notability, and I couldn't find any others during a WP:BEFORE. Honestly based on the bio the subject seems like a standard realtor, I don't see any reason to expect he would be notable. Zzz plant (talk) 22:36, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Just a sales guy. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 22:37, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - one of over a million Realtors. Bearian (talk) 21:19, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Danny Jelaca

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

Non-notable hairstylist. Promotional page (including WP:PEACOCK and WP:NOT), by suspicious account, almost certainly paid, including suspicious image. The [one reference] that might be reliable still does not really include substantive commentary about the subject that establishes notability. Fails WP:ANYBIO. Cabrils (talk) 03:42, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Businesspeople, and Illinois. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:17, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. and give it a haircut. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 22:41, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - briefly appeared in two reality shows. So did my co-worker's cousin. Bearian (talk) 21:24, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bradley J. Franc

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

The references used don't establish notability, and WP:BEFORE turned up nothing better. JSFarman (talk) 05:24, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete no claim to notability under something like WP:NPROF, WP:NAUTHOR or WP:NPOL. The best cite appears to be the Forbes article which quotes him but also relates to a personal matter about him and his son, but even if that's significant coverage of him (which I doubt) it's just one article. The rest are mostly profiles which shouldn't be counted as they tend to be self-provided.. Oblivy (talk) 06:12, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Finance, Law, and Pennsylvania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:15, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Frankly speaking, not notable. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 22:38, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete - he has some accomplishments, but the sourcing is poor. Willing to change my mind if shown more reliable sources. Bearian (talk) 21:22, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Samson Mow

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

promo nonsense about a dude who has a job with lots of fancy wikilinked words, but no meaningful independent coverage of him or his companies - in any language. It's all PR and passing mentions, if Mow is even mentioned at all. BUNNYDICAE🐇 20:40, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, China, and Canada. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:06, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The article needs a cleanup, but has enough sources to meet WP:BIO. -- Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 14:37, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the sourcing is not so great. Several of the primary sources are Forbes, which is becoming deprecated, and a literal dictatorship that is proud of itself. The subject might be a successful business person, but his associates are literally tarnishing his reputation. It's unclear if this is a BLP violation. Is this promotional or a hit job? Is it virtue signaling or Vice signaling? Was someone paid to draft this, but did a passive aggressive move? Bearian (talk) 22:43, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bill Dudleston

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

Article was created in 2007 by either Mr. Dudleston himself or one of his employees and has received little attention since. Nominating for deletion based on lack of notability. –Skywatcher68 (talk) 17:21, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related page because it was also created by Mr. Dudleston or one of his employees in 2007 as a means of promotion. Notability is also in question:

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 May 6. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:47, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:01, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:01, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete for Bill Dudleston but I am less sure about Legacy Audio as there are a few articles and reviews of their products such as [7] [8] [9] which seems like could form the basis of an article. --hroest 19:23, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Bill Dudleston. What I have found in newspapers does not meet WP:GNG. On NewspaperArchive there is a single article from 1997 that is more about Legacy than about Bill. Otherwise, it is a bunch of letters to the editor in Stereophile. I would lean delete on Legacy, but I can't !vote to !delete something exclusively because it was transparently made by a COI editor. If the claim of international company presented in a 1997 article is accurate, then it could be an article to be retained. --Mpen320 (talk) 03:22, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Bill Dudleston - Not notable. Sources only mention him in relation of Legacy Audio. Doesn't meet WP:NBIO. -- Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 16:10, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the page about him, as having basically next to no coverage - and we are not LinkedIn nor is it considered a reliable source. Not sure about the company's article, based upon the sources found. Bearian (talk) 22:55, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Angus Maclaine

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

Fails WP:NBASIC. Only claim to notability seems to be as (presumptive?) holder of a hereditary title. Holders of such titles are not automatically notable. Only other claim to notability seems to be as founder/exec of a 100-person advertising company. There are no sources to support the bulk of the article text (raising significant WP:BLP issues) or establish notability. The only source in the article is a single trivial passing mention. The only sources in the original revision were this passing mention, and the subject's own LinkedIn page and company website. I cannot find any independent/indepth coverage. (Note that title was previously BLPPROD declined by original author (after adding LinkedIn/company website sources). And A7 declined based on existence of two similar articles(?).) Guliolopez (talk) 09:16, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. Guliolopez (talk) 09:28, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Advertising, and South Africa. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alinur Velidedeoğlu

AfDs for this article:

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

It was deleted a year ago, and not much has changed since then. There’s been the same routine coverage of events, interviews, and mentions. Since he’s an advertising executive, some routine media coverage is to be expected, but direct, in‑depth, quality coverage is still lacking. Fails WP:GNG. Gheus (talk) 09:16, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Journalism, Turkey, and Michigan. Shellwood (talk) 10:15, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Businesspeople, Politics, and Advertising. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:44, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Notability is easily satisfied through both the GNG and the SNG about creative artists. The sources are not routine coverage. His advertising work is covered in depth in two academic papers. He was in charge of Turkey's second largest and oldest political party's advertising campaign. The nominator did an AfC review for this article but did not mention at all any concern about "notability" in their review comments, all their concern was about the non-encyclopedic style and NPOV violations. What is the reason for this inconsistency? If there is a notability concern, they should have mentioned in their AfC review. The subject is also the producer of various notable productions, which received coverage in sources like The Hollywood Reporter, which is considered a reliable source. The second deletion discussion was poorly attended, with non-policy-based !votes. RE: "not much has changed since then", please compare the two versions. Also, please see @Fram's comment in the first deletion discussion. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 14:30, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This article was declined by Article for Creation on May 3 for being too promotional in tone. Article was then moved to main space by the creator with the comment The article waited too long in the AfC queue, and I disagree with the feedback it received. Feel free to nominate it for deletion if there are any concerns. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 00:27, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note, but not exactly... I'm not the article's creator. It was created in 2007, and I wasn't active on Wikipedia at the time, and I have no connection to the user who created it. The AfC reviewer and the nominator of this AfD are the same user, and for some reason, they believe not much has changed between this version of the article and this earlier version. Also, they didn't say it was promotional; they said the style violates the Neutral Point of View (NPOV) policy. I wasn't sure whether that meant it was too promotional or too defamatory, as there are paragraphs that could be interpreted either way, and all based on reliable sources. Note that the sources that I used are not tabloids, but mainstream Turkish newspapers, columnists, commentators and academic papers. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 02:06, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The two versions that need to be compared are the one declined at AFC 12:03, 3 May 2025 edit and the draft moved to main space 20:07, 3 May 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alinur_Velidedeo%C4%9Flu&diff=1288613775&oldid=1288553988 You are correct that the article was declined as not written in a formal, neutral encyclopedic tone. I misspoke in my previous post when I stated the article was declined as being too promotional in tone. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:19, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The nomination statement of this AfD incorrectly states that not much has changed since the prior nomination, that's the reason I asked those two versions to be compared. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 02:01, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

comment I declined the speedy deletion, because the current article is substantially different from the one deleted, which consisted of only two of the current paragraphs. The opinion of a AfC reviewer does not constitute a deletion discussion, there is no need to have any improvement after that. No opinion on the notability, but given that it is harder to assert notability for people outside the english language world (and english references) and the efforts of TheJoyfulTentmaker in improving it, I suggest, that it is draftified/userfied if not kept - Nabla (talk) 11:48, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As I clarified in the 2nd nomination. I do not think that the sources is adequate for passing GNG.--Kadı Message 10:03, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cecilia Frank

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

The article reads more like a CV than a wikipedia article, and may be autobiographical. The subject does not seem to be notable enough to have an article - there are no sources online that I can find about them other than professional or personal sites like LinkedIn and Instagram. I'm raising this under notability concerns rather than on WP:G11 CSD terms out of an assumption of good faith, but speedy deletion may very well be warranted. Pluma (talk) 05:06, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Pluma (talk) 05:06, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Businesspeople, Women, and Sweden. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:04, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Leaning delete as the individual seems to fail WP:ARTIST - however, given this is a Swedish designer, I would like to see someone fluent in Swedish take a look into her and make sure we aren't missing some significant Swedish language coverage not available in English. Worth noting that the same user has also created a few other articles on Swedish designers (and one company) with what appear to be similar issues: Nikolaus Frank, Lars Lallerstedt, and Frank Etc. Ethmostigmus 🌿 (talk | contribs) 08:06, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Swedish-speaker here, I can't find any coverage of subject in the Swedish press (I searched using her name, husband's name, design firm name). There is an English interview w/ them here[10], but I don't think we can base a stub off this + not sure about the source reliability wrt notability. Zzz plant (talk) 03:50, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I've likewise tried and failed to find Swedish sources – searching for Cecilia Frank and designer or design yields nothing in the Swedish newspaper archives I've got access to, for example. Would be delighted to change my !vote if someone has more luck than I have. /Julle (talk) 12:32, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Siita Sofo Hissan

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

Highly promotional bio; subject fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. Sources are a mix of WP:PRIMARYSOURCE official bios ([11], [12]) press releases from his organization ([13]) and a few churnalism articles about his organization (not WP:SIGCOV of him that read like press releases ([14], [15], [16], [17]), and WP:TRIVIALMENTIONs ([18]). A WP:BEFORE search turns up some more content, all of it highly promotional and likely to be based on press releases. For example, this one is described as press release by GhanaWeb and reprinted in ModernGhana with promotional fluff like In a tale woven with accolades, Siita Sofo Prince...emerges as a catalyst for change and empowerment. And this article in DailyGuideNetwork is also reprinted in ModernGhana, with similar over-the-top statements and apparently based entirely on quotes from the subject. All told, I'm not seeing any WP:SIGCOV of the subject that I can confidently say is independent of him and in reliable sources. Dclemens1971 (talk) 18:23, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Ghana. Dclemens1971 (talk) 18:23, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Yip. Seems to be based on X of Y notability (in this case 40 under 40) which is a false premise and thats provided enough to spin an article up. No indication of significance. Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:BIO. scope_creep^Talk 03:35, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Christoph Glauser

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

An associate professor with a rather light career output (18 works on ORCID; 5 on Scopus); doesn't meet WP:NACADEMIC and doesn't seem to have sufficient media engagement to meet WP:GNG. It also looks like an unacknowledged translation from the German article (also suggesting that we're not missing anything). Notability tagged for 2 months. Klbrain (talk) 08:54, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Businesspeople, and Switzerland. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:14, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – I have 293 results on Swissdox, but many are false postivies for a master cheesemaker and head of the Käserei Zäziwil, whose promotion of Emmental cheese has gotten lots of coverage. On account of this cheesy interference, it will take me longer than usual to analyze the sources. Toadspike [Talk] 15:32, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

weak delete as he doesnt meet WP:NPROF, but seems to have some sort of public profile. However, I dont see many news articles about him (or at least dont have access in Canada) but lets see whether Toadspike can find anything more. --hroest 15:41, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep:

[19] A part-interview piece that has enough info about him to count towards the GNG. [20] [21] Plus two more with probably sigcov about him predicting the 2016 US election
It seems his doctoral thesis was edited down and published as a book, titled "Einfach blitzsauber: Die Geschichte des Staubsaugers". Yes, it is about the history of the vacuum cleaner. It was reviewed by: NZZ, 16 March 2002, "Der Staubsauger, das unbekannte Wesen" by Aiolfi S.; Berner Zeitung, later reprinted in the Neue Luzerner Zeitung, 27.10.2001, "Eine verstaubte Geschichte entstaubt", Franziska Egli; Tages-Anzeiger, "Staub als Thema", 16.10.2001, Walter Jäggi; Die Weltwoche, "Hauptsache, sauber", 11.10.2001, Benini Sandro; Le Temps, "Le grand nettoyage par le vide ou les cent ans de l'aspirateur", 29.08.2001, Isabelle Cerboneschi; and short reviews in the Solothurner Zeitung and Blick. This book is, apparently, notable.
Non-independent coverage of ArgYou [22] and a related interview [23], which has a bio of him too.
Glauser was quoted as an expert on brand image in an article in Le Temps titled "Les petits nouveaux et le storytelling", 17 June 2022, by Matthias Niklowitz – this article also appeared in the Handelszeitung in German, but I can't find either version online. Similar expert quotes of Glauser alongside sigcov of ArgYou here [24]. I've found quite a few other instances where he is quoted as an expert in a variety of papers, but I won't list them all here to save time and space.
ArgYou seems to be regularly cited as a source of data, with articles often mentioning Glauser's name as well. One example is this newswire piece from Keystone-SDA, reprinted in a bunch of papers [25].

Sorry for spamming all these links here. I haven't quite gone through all the newspaper database results (I got distracted by other stuff) but I think there's enough to keep here. Toadspike [Talk] 19:56, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Klbrain@Hannes Röst Would you like to take a look at the above? I think the first three sources, linked in the first bullet point, should be enough. Toadspike [Talk] 19:57, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Had a look, and still not impressed, although understand if others disagree. That an internet marketing expert can get some fireside chats published in some blog-like website covered in adds doesn't seem sufficient to me for WP:GNG. The research claims made in those articles are likely to be factually true, but don't demonstrate that WP:NACADEMIC is reached. Klbrain (talk) 20:13, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure which website you are referring to, but all of the sources I cited are reliable Swiss newspapers (except maybe Blick, which is a tabloid, but one with a decent reputation regardless). The level of advertising is not a measure of reliability, though if you like I can email you the print versions of nearly all of the sources I cited, which have far fewer ads. Toadspike [Talk] 21:06, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Christine Nichols

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

Sources for person covered by the article appear to be minor awards and not especially significant, and may not rise to the level required by WP:ANYBIO Noleander (talk) 20:37, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:42, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:42, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:42, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:43, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:04, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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 23:35, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Erika Monroe

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

I'm not finding the kind of coverage of this news anchor and public relations agent, to meet WP:ENTERTAINER, WP:REPORTER or WP:GNG. What I have found are social media posts, IMDb and other user-submitted content, and several articles about her divorce from her husband (who is notable.) It may have been originally created as an autobiography based on the similarity with the editor's user name. Netherzone (talk) 18:03, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Businesspeople, Women, Arizona, and California. Netherzone (talk) 18:03, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as the subject doesn't meet WP:ENTERTAINER. I also find it suspect that User:Erika Monroe 1 worked on these articles. If they persist after the deletions we should explain WP:N and WP:COI to them. Also, I'm inclined to think the subject doesn't meet WP:PRIMARYTOPIC; if she does, we should redirect to Matt_Williams_(third_baseman)#Personal_life –The Sophocrat (talk) 23:39, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Netherzone (talk) 13:24, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the expansion since nomination?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:31, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: No notability on her own proved. Doesn't meet WP:NENT or WP:NBIO. No SIGCOV or RS. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 20:04, 10 May 2025 (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.

Ryan Petersen (businessman)

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

There doesn't seem to be any independent notability here, it seems like deleting or redirecting to Flexport would make sense. BuySomeApples (talk) 02:58, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Transportation, California, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:01, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete or Draftify~~ Keep: There exist some reliable sources WP:RS: [26][27] [28] and to a lesser degree [29] for some biographical information. The current article is bad and may be worth blowing up altogether (WP:TNT). A future article has potential. I'm also okay with Draftify as a result. I made changes and I think the current (stub) article is worth keeping. — 🌊PacificDepths (talk) 07:19, 2 May 2025 (UTC) – updated 01:48, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify. The entire article is riddled with unedited ChatGPT citations, everything needs to be double-checked for relevance and accuracy and cleaned up. It's bad, but not quite WP:TNT bad. Dandykong1 (talk) 11:48, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify seems like there are RSes to support inclusion but the whole thing has to be redone. There is enough notability to justify inclusion, but it would need to be spearheaded by someone who is willing to actually write it properly. Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 22:16, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I made a major rewrite of the article. Please review: BuySomeApples, Dandykong1, Gjb0zWxOb — 🌊PacificDepths (talk) 06:11, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- The article does look much better. I wasn't sure if Ryan Petersen is notable outside of Flexport since all the sources seem to be about the company, but if consensus is leaning towards a standalone page for him I'll withdraw this nom. BuySomeApples (talk) 21:11, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I definitely think this constitutes an improvement and the sources seem solid. I am willing to withdraw and/or amend my vote here unless there is someone who thinks I am missing something here. Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 21:16, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Flexport. jp×g🗯️ 04:08, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, I think this discussion is split between Draftification and Merge/Redirection.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:30, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Flexport: Source and target are short enough and while notable, have significant overlap. Komodo (talk) 06:37, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merging is a bad idea in my opinion. There shouldn't be personal biographies in company articles. The subject has enough independent coverage for its own article.--Afus199620 (talk) 15:25, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kudakwashe Regimond Tagwirei

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

Delete on the grounds of WP:TNT for now, there might be notability. Inappropriate sources used, many sources don't mention Tagwirei or just have a passing mention, unnecessary commentary and promotional language (likely LLM) used in the page, MOS issues. Hmr (talk) 01:57, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Zimbabwe. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:37, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding the entry for Kudakwashe Regimond Tagwirei, I request that it not be deleted. It's important to note that his sanctioning was reportedly based on the Sentry Report. However, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) report, available at [30], presented different findings which were not considered in the Sentry Report something that I have referenced well.

I will adjust the tone to ensure neutrality and balance the information presented.

Additionally, I plan to remove a couple of categories from the page.

The Sentry Report, originating from an NGO, has been cited as a basis for US sanctions. Conversely, the Parliamentary Accounts Committee, along with the Land Tenure System Implementation Committee, did not find him guilty in their report.

It's also important to provide a platform for people with no voice like him that may not be readily available elsewhere. As a volunteer, I believe this platform can facilitate a broader understanding and allow for critique from other editors.

Further relevant information includes his involvement with the Arundel Hospital, which reportedly serves the poor, his membership in the WEF ([31]), and his ownership of Sakunda Holdings, which has partnered with Swiss-based Trafigura. While the Command Agriculture program he initiated faced challenges, it is credited with contributing to wheat sufficiency in Zimbabwe. Zvazviri (talk) 15:02, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 02:39, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ilker Furat

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

Fails WP:NBIO. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 19:08, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Boxing and Turkey. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 19:08, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Management, and Aviation. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:10, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:58, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Malame Mangzha

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

There is next to no coverage of her outside of social media and mentions on the company website. Fails WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 14:57, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, and Nigeria. Shellwood (talk) 15:10, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I find this untrue, as i cited references mentioning her. infact, i did not cite any company website. please review again Alan Gadzama (talk) 14:22, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The only mention of her is an excerpt of an interview, and interviews do not contribute to notability as they are just the person talking about themselves. Maybe those articles might help the notability of her company, but nothing supports the notability of her as a person. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 14:30, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - leadership of a company or NGO doesn't inherit notability from the organization they lead. I don't oppose a redirect. Bearian (talk) 08:16, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - a search for sources fails WP:SIGCOV Vegantics (talk) 19:06, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to African International Documentary Festival Foundation. Insufficient secondary WP:SIGCOV. Hmr (talk) 22:07, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if editors think that Deletion or Redirection is a better closure decision.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:08, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Meher Pudumjee

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

A promotional biography of a businesswoman fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. None of the sources constitute WP:SIGCOV. Majorly citations are WP:NEWSORGINDIA, WP:ROUTINE, and WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS. Just a detailed resume WP:NOTRESUME. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 11:06, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, India, and Maharashtra. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 11:06, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:21, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the subject has won several made up in one day awards for up and coming but run of the mill business person. See also WP:SPAM and WP:NOTFB. Bearian (talk) 08:37, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Insufficient independent significant coverage. Very promotional.Forbes has hundreds of people on its lists each year and a lot of them don't have articles. Being on the list alone doesn't mean you're inherently notable. Per WP:NEWSORGINDIA there are concerns about Indian sources providing paid/sponsored coverage which is in line with the tone of this article. She after all is the daughter of one of India's richest tycoons. - Imcdc Contact 00:56, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I can see some substantial coverage that meets Wikipedia's notability standard WP:GNG. Here is the In-depth coverage: Forbes, Business Standrad, DNA India, India Today, and potentially additional information can be discovered with a Google search. B-Factor (talk) 06:31, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:19, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@B-Factor The 3 Indian news sources are questionable at best due to the high possibility of undisclosed sponsored reporting, especially in reporting people of borderline notability.

Forbes is a reliable source but I'm not sure if that blurb will be enough to pass WP:SIGCOV. It doesn't talk about her personal life at all. ApexParagon (talk) 14:41, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete for now. When there is more coverage, can build the page again. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 19:38, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kushal N. Desai

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

A promotional biography of a businessman fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. None of the sources constitute WP:SIGCOV. Majorly citations are WP:NEWSORGINDIA, WP:ROUTINE, and WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS. Just a detailed resume WP:NOTRESUME. Also, simply being the grandson of an industrialist doesn't justify having a Wikipedia page. Notability cannot be inherited. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 07:44, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, India, and Gujarat. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 07:44, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. If User:DGG were alive, he'd probably assume notability, but the consensus is that co-owning a billion-dollar company inherited from grandfather is not automatically inherently notable by inheritance. I'm not against a reasonable redirect. Bearian (talk) 09:11, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Insufficient independent significant coverage. Quite promotional.Notability is not determined by how rich one is. Per WP:NEWSORGINDIA there are concerns about Indian sources providing paid/sponsored coverage which would apply here given he is a billionaire. Pretty in line with the article's tone.- Imcdc Contact 01:00, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Promotional tone has been written out from the article and there are good independent sources also.The subject is a billionaire and there is enough significant coverage available about him in credible sources like Business Today, Fortune India, Forbes, and online also. He was listed among the top Indian billionaire[32]. The Hurun India Rich List, Fortune India, and Waterfield Advisors are all notable recognitions. The Subject clearly passes WP:NBASIC.Lobbymaster (talk) 17:46, 7 May 2025 (UTC) Note: This user is creator of the article[reply]
Keep: From reading the sources, the individual seems to have received significant coverage in reliable media publications like Fortune India and Business Today, which are not trivial and satisfy WP:NBASIC. Monhiroe (talk) 08:05, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 14:02, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, There is hardly i can found significant coverage about the subject except his Grandfather and his company. And as per Bearian Notability doesn't come inherently. Rajeev Gaur123 (talk) 10:15, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Polansky

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

This article fails WP:GNG with flying colors. First, notability is WP:NOTINHERITED. If you remove the relationship this person has with Lady Gaga, then you would be hard pressed to find anything written about them. The subject may be accomplished, but there are absolutely no independent, reliable sources speaking on the subject in a way that isn’t mere mention. How can the CEO of a company have their own article before the company they are the CEO of is even notable enough for its own article? Marry Lady Gaga? Doesn’t meet the notability requirement. Brickto (talk) 08:03, 24 April 2025 (UTC)— Brickto (talk · contribs) is a confirmed sock puppet of 9t5 (talk · contribs). GreenLipstickLesbian 💌🦋 07:11, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Minnesota-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:21, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:21, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:22, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete his business ventures get vastly overshadowed by a relationship with Gaga and (to a lesser extent) the songs they wrote together. Little to none of the publicity this guy gets is focused on individual merits, and the more I think about this, the harder it becomes to find any credible sources on him that don't largely revolve around her and their relationship. Even pieces where Polansky is a central topic devote more attention to that part of him than anything else. Having a romance or even marriage to a famous person doesn't automatically entitle someone to a page, so I'm inclined to think we have a failure of WP:BIO here. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 12:19, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per GNG and CREATIVE. Seems obvious to me the subject has been profiled in multiple reliable sources. Sources like this are specifically focused on him and his accomplishments. He has co-written a dozen or so songs that have charted and no one is suggesting he is only notable because of his relationship with Lady Gaga. This biography should be expanded, not deleted. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 12:45, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete - At least for now, I agree with the nominator. Note that every single one of the 16 sources currently used in the article have Lady Gaga's name in their titles, but only a few have Polansky's name. The same is true of the Billboard article found by the last voter. Beyond that article, I can find nothing else about his business ventures or songwriting that is not dependent on his connection with Lady Gaga. WP:NOTINHERITED is the obvious guideline here, unless he emerges as the topic of additional dedicated news coverage in the future. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 12:52, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just because an article title includes "Lady Gaga" doesn't mean the reporting is not focused on the subject. Of course writers are going to sneak "Lady Gaga" into the title in an attempt to increase readership. There are many Wikipedia biographies for songwriters who have (co)/authored many songs that have charted. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 13:22, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

...and then they talk about her more than him. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 19:10, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We'll have to agree to disagree. Happy editing! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 19:17, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Another Believer: Lady Gaga is also the primary subject of these titles as well.. “Who is Lady Gaga's fiancé?”, “Inside Lady Gaga's love story” —— these are articles about Lady Gaga. The subject of the nominated article doesn’t become notable by being in a relationship with someone who is notable. It may seem that way due to the fact that Lady Gaga is arguably one of the most notable figures of the 21st century thus far, but it isn’t. Polansky simply is not notable enough for his own article, and it is WP:TOOSOON. Brickto (talk) 05:57, 25 April 2025 (UTC)— Brickto (talk · contribs) is a confirmed sock puppet of 9t5 (talk · contribs). GreenLipstickLesbian 💌🦋 06:24, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep , more than enough available sources to further expand the article --Sricsi (talk) 16:45, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sricsi; Could you list these sources? The subject is not notable independent of his relationship with Lady Gaga. There are plenty of sources about the subject that cover him and his role in his company? I can’t find any. WP:TOOSOON Brickto (talk) 05:46, 25 April 2025 (UTC)— Brickto (talk · contribs) is a confirmed sock puppet of 9t5 (talk · contribs). GreenLipstickLesbian 💌🦋 06:24, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep: It looks good to me, and I don't fancy wasting time with a sockpuppet's nomination. ☆ Bri (talk) 15:16, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above keepers. And anyone who proposes using a blade of grass is notable per se. Randy Kryn (talk) 16:03, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Chippla ✍️ - Best Regards 11:13, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per above. It seems good, 'nuff said. He's more than the relationship ☩ ^{(Babysharkboss2)} 17:48, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per SNUGGUMS comment, as he isn't notable in the public eye and basically a private individual who's only connection to fame is Lady Gaga; I fear that this Wikipedia article might be entrenching too much on Gaga's personal private life. PHShanghai | they/them (talk) 15:15, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A private individual? He is attending film premieres and red carpets, and he has co-written multiple songs that have achieved tremendous chart success. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:20, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The only public events he appears to attend are those that involve his fiancé. Outside of that and her photos of him, we don't see much of this man photographed, and both interviews with him that I can think of are joint ones discussing Gaga's music where she also is questioned on the matter and gives comments to journalists. If we were to subtract these things, then at least compared to Ms. Germanotta here and many other celebrities, Polansky does sound rather private overall even when not completely hiding from the press or her fanbase. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 00:11, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We'll have to agree to disagree. I still think CREATIVE outweighs the fact that perhaps he's a relatively more private person. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 00:28, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep By virtue of being engaged to one of the top 10 most famous women in the world, yes, he will be prefaced as "Lady Gaga's fiancé." If you can believe it, François-Henri Pinault is still called "Salma Hayek's husband". But I digress. With regard to Mr. Polansky here, I say take away the Lady Gaga of it all and look at the accomplishments in business. I see notability there. Again, yes the sources will talk about Lady Gaga but I think he knows what he signed up for there. This Michael Polansky man has fashion magazines doing articles about him and he's not even in the fashion industry. Trillfendi (talk) 15:30, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Notability is not inherited (per Doomsdayer520 above). Is he independently notable? Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 15:58, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify - I have been avoiding commenting here for a number of days since I noticed this one, and for much the same reason as Bri - I can't be bothered to put in effort on a sock puppet's nomination. But this is not a policy reason to keep. It looks good is not policy based. He's engaged to marry someone famous is not policy based (NOTINHERITED). The sourcing is poor, and I don't think we are at GNG for an independently reliable subject. Should it be deleted? I haven't done the deep search for sources required, but I suspect so. If this closed as no consensus, I would not mind. It would give those arguing keep a couple of months of grace to find sources before any potential renom by an editor in good standing. Or we could draftify as it is new, and as it may well be that more sources will arise soon. But we are not at a keep, I think. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 16:11, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Re: "He's engaged to marry someone famous is not policy based (NOTINHERITED)." No one is suggesting he deserves an article for his relationship status or because of Gaga. Take away his engagement and he is still a songwriter with an impressive chart record. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:47, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I only see songs co-written, which would suggest a redirect to the artist who sang the song. If he performed a song that charted that would be different per WP:MUSICBIO. I am not seeing that. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 17:49, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't interpret WP:MUSICBIO as applying only to vocalists but not songwriters. Nonetheless, there's plenty of secondary coverage focused on him. The article has 18 sources that mention him by name in the title. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:51, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

These look like primary news reporting (see WP:PRIMARYNEWS), and, per Doomsdayer520 above, mostly about Lady Gaga. This would be a prime case of a subject that is better dealt with as a subject on the other page. Thus I would be content with a merge (it would clearly be a limited merge). Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 18:03, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Caroline Boudreaux

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

I've nominated this individual's nonprofit organization for AfD as well, however I think that the subject of this article itself is not notable either. I've searched the subject up - and it seems that a majority of the sources available are interviews (primary sources) or instances of WP:BLP1E (for their work with the Miracle Foundation, the nonprofit they started). WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 23:15, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Women, and United States of America. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 23:15, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Louisiana-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:52, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep meets WP:GNG: 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4. Other profiles that I'm not as sure about: [33], [34]. These all offer significant coverage in reliable sources. A career is not one event. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 08:16, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete All of the sources tell the same "origin story" so we are lacking enough beyond that to for this to be about her. I understand why NOM is calling this blp1e, although I don't think that's quite correct. It's as if the article for Zuckerberg only had sources that talked about the invention of FB in his college dorm, and nothing after that. The potentially significant UBS source fails - the link is to a general page and I find nothing under her name. Lamona (talk) 03:02, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree with WP:BLP1E, and it seems that Caroline Boudreaux meets WP:NBASIC. What guideline are you referring to when you say the sources tell the same origin story? Hmr (talk) 04:38, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NBASIC asks for "multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other" ... I read that as saying that if they all have the same content, they are not intellectually independent. Also, none that I can find give much basic biographical information, nor information that covers the years that follow the founding of the organization (except two talks that aren't usable sources). I don't see that there is enough info for a stand-alone article. It may be possible to cover her in the article on the organization, if it meets basic. Lamona (talk) 16:56, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as sources provided by Eddie891 give WP:SIGCOV of the subject in reliable sources from different years (2007, 2015-16). They provide biographical details about the subject as well as information of the founding of the Miracle Foundation as well as details of how she advocates for orphans internationally. Nnev66 (talk) 15:56, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per nominator and Lamona. DarkHorseMayhem (talk) 23:11, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:03, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Lamona as all the sources tell the same origin story but little else. That happened in 2000, so there should have been other coverage over the past 25 years. This source shouldn't even be in the article now, as it is mislabeled (it is written by subject, not by someone else) and it is a Forbes contributor site which is not considered WP:RS. All but one of the sources listed by Eddie891 are profiles which are insufficient to establish WP:GNG.--FeralOink (talk) 13:19, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Could you elaborate how profiles ‘are insufficient to establish GNG’? Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 14:13, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - Eddie891, in my opinion those profiles are puff pieces and hardly good examples of in-depth journalism. Drmies (talk) 15:13, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- While I agree the coverage of the subject is from a human interest vantage and there are flourishes in the language (i.e. not Woodward and Bernstein journalism), I don't see why these articles are "puff pieces" that don't count towards WP:BASIC. Also, where does it say in Wikipedia policy that coverage in city newspapers where the subject lives doesn't count towards notability? There is quite a bit of information in these articles about the subject herself as well as her organization that evolves over time. There is also coverage that lists the subject's awards in Dataquest, 2019 and Decclan Chronicle, 2018, which include the UBS Global Visionary award and United Nations Humanitarian Award which the subject received in 2017. PS. I removed the Forbes ref from the article as it didn't add anything. Nnev66 (talk) 19:49, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  I agree with the gist of what Nnev is saying here- these clearly profiles in well-regarded, prominent newspapers over a range of years (exactly what we look for when establishing notability), and from them it would totally be possible to write a substantive article (if not the longest OOT). not too much else matters. I don't think it fair to dismiss them out of hand as puffery, even if they aren't the best possible. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 06:47, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment To illustrate what I (above) called "the same story" I ran 3 of the online, textual articles through a plagiarism program. I'm not saying there was plagiarism going on, but such a program detects when the exact same sentence or paragraph is found in multiple sources online. The three came out as 37%, 41% and 48% "alike" with rather large chunks being identical. I assume that we need at least 2 sources with mostly unique content, and I'm not seeing that. I also note that someone has added a youtube video of a ted talk to the article. This is not an independent source. I will move it to the "external links" area. (Giving a TEDx talk is not itself notable - TEDx is described as "TEDx events, which are "essentially, do-it-yourself TED conferences"). I also think that we would get closer to reliability if we can find listing for the awards. I will research that. Lamona (talk) 05:03, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm guessing you didn't run through the Austin American-Statesman references from 2007 and 2010 as linked from newspapers.com. These differ more significantly from the CS Monitor, People, and other references from around 2015. Also, I had looked for links to the UBS Global Visionary and United Nations web sites for direct confirmation of awards but their web sites unfortunately don't seem to keep an archive of past awardees. Nnev66 (talk) 15:37, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In that case one should consider winnowing down the ones that read like copies and getting the majority of the article from the ones that appear to have more journalistic merit. Lamona (talk) 20:52, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My concern with the Austin American-Statesman articles is that Austin, Texas is her hometown and is or was her residence. Coverage, 18 years ago, in her hometown newspaper, doesn't help much for establishing WP:GNG.--FeralOink (talk) 00:23, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The UN does have a humanitarian award, but Boudreaux is not listed on the UN news site where others are listed. Of course, the UN web site could be lacking - the online entries may not cover the year she was awarded. I searched on her last name. For the "Hope award" - this one is tricky because the only award with that name addresses cancer research. I found the Robert F. Kennedy Ripple of Hope Award but again I don't find her listed. So the awards remain a mystery. Perhaps others will have better results. Lamona (talk) 20:50, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I am leaning towards K*eep for this person, however redirecting or merging it into Miracle Foundation would be an excellent alternative to deletion. I understand that that article has also been nominated for deletion, however it seems quite clear it's notable per GNG and NCORP per these fully independent, secondary reliable sources found in Newspapers.com (access required) that provide significant coverage over a period of years (over ten years of coverage!): [35], [36], [37], [38], [39], [40], [41], and more. I've added my !vote to the other article, waiting for now on !voting here. BTW, WP:BLP1E does not seem to apply here because there is sustained coverage of both Ms. Boudreaux and the foundation for many years. I'd like to hear other editor's thoughts on redirecting/merging if the article on the foundation is kept. Netherzone (talk) 16:44, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would be fine to merge if kept, since the foundation is the only notable thing she has done. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 16:56, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ditto. Her bio and her role should fit nicely into the article on the organization. That said, if the organization is not found to be notable, it would be difficult to find the founder notable if there aren't other projects she was responsible for.
Lamona (talk) 20:56, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Miracle Foundation is the only organization or project for which she is known.--FeralOink (talk) 00:11, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I noted on the Miracle Foundation AfD that I'm OK with merging the founder into the foundation article. Actually, I've shifted to thinking that would make the most sense - originally my first choice was to keep both articles. I've summarized the best Miracle Foundation sources in reply to Lamona's comment about WP:WHYN and WP:SUSTAINED in that AfD. Nnev66 (talk) 17:24, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
All the discussion on the Miracle Foundation AfD and Lamona's nice table there point me back to supporting this page. I think the main issue is that Boudreaux and Miracle Foundation are intertwined in most of the references, but there are now seven references in the this article from independent reliable secondary sources (six if you only count Austin Statesman once), each of which contributes to the article that I've now updated. In total these provide significant coverage. While Boudreaux is only notable for the Miracle Foundation, it has evolved over time, as has the coverage of Boudreaux, thus I don't think this is a case of WP:BLP1E. Nnev66 (talk) 01:19, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete changing from R*direct does not meet notability criteria, and no viable target for a redirect. and merge content to Miracle Foundation, as the sourcing is not really so much about her, but about her role in the Miracle Foundation, which, as stated above by other editors, is the only notable thing she has done. Netherzone (talk) 22:28, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment First, I agree with what Drmies said about these particular profiles not being examples of journalism; they are lightweight human interest stories. Next, I noticed (and removed) another source in the article, see talk page section. Author-published book from defunct CreateSpace ("they would publish anything" per Wiki), no page number(s) given. Also, be aware that the Miracle Foundation article is not in good shape. It needs a lot of editing due to really bad writing (sentence fragments, etc.) and was tagged accordingly in the past. And it was mostly written by a COI editor.--FeralOink (talk) 00:06, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 02:48, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Abdi Awad Ali

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

He gets a lot of mentions, but I can't find any significant coverage of him in independent, reliable sources. The current sourcing barely mentions him at all. Fails WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:07, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Somalia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:44, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Haji Abdi Awad is one of the most well-known entrepreneurs in Somaliland. All sources I've cited adequately mention him and cover the article's content. If any reference is problematic please point it out so we can take a look.

One thing to note when it comes to Somali-related articles is nicknames and transliteration, which makes it a bit difficult to find significant coverage if you're not familiar. 𐒈𐒚𐒐𐒆𐒛𐒒 Gebagebo (talk) 23:26, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:19, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

comment I see this non RS source but maybe it is useful to others to find better sources? I may also help if an arabic speaker can check al-manhal WP:TWL. Another passing mention in an RS here Czarking0 (talk) 15:25, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 04:30, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mohammed Ahmed (businessman)

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

the sources are dependent and only one has something similar to deep coverage, but the sources itself is not reliable and independent (this one Ethiopian birthday) other are WP:Trades and nothing similar to significant coverage OatPancake (talk) 13:54, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. OatPancake (talk) 13:54, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Ethiopia. Shellwood (talk) 13:57, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Individual is known for the success of Africa's largest airlines. According to Fana Broadcasting Corporate "The late Captain Mohammed Ahmed, a pioneering force in the aviation industry and a cherished leader of Ethiopian Airlines" [42]Magherbin (talk) 05:55, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete doesn't meet Wikipedia's notability standards, lacking significant coverage from independent, reliable sources. If it relies on promotional content or self-published material, it would also fail to meet the site's neutrality and sourcing guidelines.--Hka-34 Jyli (talk) 08:05, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hka-34 Jyli: So does it contain promotional content or not? MarioGom (talk) 09:28, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cinder painter (talk) 17:15, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Goldsztajn (talk) 06:45, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DeleteI cannot find multiple reliable significant coverage to meet ANY BIO. One so-so source is not enough. --NiftyyyNofteeeee (talk) 09:10, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One last attempt to get more participation.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 17:47, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Appears to be quite clearly notable based on the sources already cited in the article. Even putting the others aside, the fact that an African CEO received coverage in the Washington Post and the New York Times during the 1980s strongly indicates notability (both are about the company, but in my view also contain SIGCOV of Ahmed's role in its rise as CEO). This BBC report doesn't provide SIGCOV of him, but it does refer to him as the renowned Ethiopian CEO (known for challenging the Dergue officials in defence of the independence of the management of the airline), which also strongly suggests to me that he is notable. He also has mentions in several books that I can't fully access, including these ones. And there's this obituary written by a university faculty member and this one by a staff writer. I think it's more than enough to pass WP:GNG. MCE89 (talk) 16:03, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Per sources presented by MCE89. Svartner (talk) 16:38, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Broad coverage of his time as CEO of Ethiopian Airlines in many reliable sources, and also multiple with significant coverage per MCE89. jocelyn's dance ^talk 19:06, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per MCE89 Andre🚐 03:10, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This person seems to have sufficient sources from RSes such as from the New York Times, The Washington Post, and others. He definitely seems to have done notable things worthy of inclusion on here. Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 14:39, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Conheça Walt Disney World

Businesspeople