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.
Keep The article appears to be well sourced. The subject has published op-ed pieces and received some international attention.
[1][2][3][4]Eudemis (
talk) 15:25, 14 July 2010 (UTC)reply
Delete [comment redacted per
WP:BLP, doesn't give any real reason for deleting]
58.160.82.98 (
talk) 14:24, 20 July 2010 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Ron Ritzman (
talk) 00:45, 21 July 2010 (UTC)reply
Keep - Multiple source mentions, clearly over the notability bar.
Carrite (
talk)
Keep sources provided look adequate, as well a search at
PW seems to indicate good coverage. JujutacularT ·
C 13:52, 21 July 2010 (UTC)reply
Keep. There is not a whole lot of coverage, but it is spread over the period of several years and, in at least a few cases, is fairly detailed. Passes
WP:BIO, even if the case is not very strong.
Nsk92 (
talk) 17:02, 21 July 2010 (UTC)reply
Keep Sufficient reliable sources to show notability.
Edward321 (
talk) 01:20, 25 July 2010 (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.