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. Vanamonde (
Talk) 17:00, 13 March 2023 (UTC)reply
WP:NOTNEWS, short-lived faits-divers without lasting notability.
WP:PSEUDO also applies: " If the event itself is not notable enough for an article, and the person was noted only in connection with it, it's very likely that there is no reason to cover that person at all."
Fram (
talk) 16:59, 6 March 2023 (UTC)reply
Please see
WP:SUSTAINED and the links given in the deletion statement. Meeting the GNG narrowly isn't sufficient to be kept, though not meeting the GNG is usually sufficient to be deleted.
Fram (
talk) 17:06, 6 March 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete - I don't think a bank error/glitch needs its own article.
Americanfreedom (
talk) 18:15, 6 March 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete - Promo language and
WP:REFBOMB for a page that seems to be more about PayPal than about the subject; it could be included in the PayPal article as an example of major glitch, but that's really it.
Ppt91talk 18:21, 6 March 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete: per above, 1E with no LASTING. BLPs need clearly reliable sourcing, this does not. //
Timothy ::
talk 14:14, 13 March 2023 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.