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.
Still unsourced after 14 years. Very little on Google beyond routine coverage. Warrants deletion unless someone has something to add.
Dorama285 (
talk) 23:39, 17 March 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. A Google search turned up nothing but PR Newswire and Business Wire press releases. The only other coverage were minor mentions. With no significant third-party coverage and notability not shown, this fails
WP:GNG and
WP:BIO. -
AuthorAuthor (
talk) 00:00, 18 March 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete - financial and investment advisers are
run of the mill. There's nothing from what I can see that shows he passes
WP:GNG.
Bearian (
talk) 00:15, 18 March 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete a non-notable financial journalist. When we source an article to the subjects own publications that is redflag status. This article also seems overly promotional and almost trying to use Wikipedia as an add platform.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 13:07, 18 March 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete the only sourcing I could find was basic PR churnalism. Best,
GPL93 (
talk) 17:20, 24 March 2020 (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.