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 keep. Consensus is that the article needs clean-up rather than deletion.
(non-admin closure)Enos733 (
talk) 23:41, 28 February 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep Article could use a lot of clean up - overly detailed, promotional in some areas, etc. - but the cited sources pass
WP:GNG.
ElKevbo (
talk) 00:00, 22 February 2022 (UTC)reply
Weak keep. Agree with ElKevbo's analysis--the page needs clean up but there is enough IRS to justify it staying.
Cabrils (
talk) 00:43, 22 February 2022 (UTC)reply
Weak keep. Clean up but agree with ElKevbo. --
SlideAndSlip (
talk) 15:28, 22 February 2022 (UTC)reply
keep It has lot of primary sources but still, there are few sources that give notability to this person.
Laptopinmyhands (
talk) 14:07, 23 February 2022 (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.