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. I expect this will be an unpopular close, but I find the arguments to keep, while numerically in the majority, to be weak on policy. The creator of the article argues to keep, but gives no reason. Two of the other arguments to keep are essentially WP:CRYSTAL.

On the other side, the argument that this is WP:1EVENT strikes me as sound.

If future events unfold which add substantial coverage to this person, this can, of course, be revisited. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:20, 26 July 2017 (UTC) reply

Kamil Ekim Alptekin

Kamil Ekim Alptekin (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

Non-notable individual. Lacks non-trivial, in-depth support. Falls under WP:1EVENT. reddogsix ( talk) 18:17, 24 June 2017 (UTC) reply

• Delete. I agree that Mr. Alptekin is essentially only known for a single minor thing that is relatively recent, and that there is not enough secondary source coverage to fill out the article. Maybe he'll become more notable later, if he is further involved in current events or does something like run for public office, but Wikipedia isn't in the news business. RexSueciae ( talk) 19:01, 24 June 2017 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:39, 24 June 2017 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:39, 24 June 2017 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 23:29, 24 June 2017 (UTC) reply

• Keep per creator -- Wikipietime ( talk) 16:59, 25 June 2017 (UTC) reply

• Comment - Aren't you the article creator? reddogsix ( talk) 18:21, 27 June 2017 (UTC) reply

• Keep. Major role in Eclipse Aerospace, ongoing role in Inovo BV and the exploration of the Leviathan gas field, ongoing involvement in U.S.-Turkish relations and the Michael T. Flynn lobbying controversy. PvOberstein ( talk) 20:57, 27 June 2017 (UTC) reply
  • @ Wcquidditch:: I did some more digging since you first voted to delete, does it look any better now? He's been involved in the aviation industry since the early 2000s ( Eclipse Aviation Corporation and Eclipse Aerospace) atop a few other things. PvOberstein ( talk) 03:36, 29 June 2017 (UTC) reply

While you've added content, I still don't see the article subject meeting WP:GNG. I think recentism and WP:1E also applies and, therefore, disqualifies the article subject from GNG and encyclopedic worthiness. -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 03:57, 29 June 2017 (UTC) reply

I'd ill have to disagree with your 'notable for only one event', as Ekim Alptekin's role in turning around a New Mexican aviation company was discussed in multiple secondary sources at the time, (within and outside of the United States), adding some notability for a figure in the aviation industry, atop his ongoing involvement in the Michael Flynn controversy. PvOberstein ( talk) 04:12, 29 June 2017 (UTC) reply

He's marginally notable for the Flynn event, only. Coverage in a few publications during a short news cycle for the aviation company story isn't encyclopedic-worthy notability. That takes us back to 1E (Flynn). And then, there's recentism. -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 04:36, 29 June 2017 (UTC) reply

• Delete -- mostly a CVdesigned to promote the subject. And what is an "advocate for improved Turkish-American relations"? K.e.coffman ( talk) 22:24, 4 July 2017 (UTC) reply

@ K.e.coffman: More for the benefit of the record than to change anyone's mind, I would like it noted that nothing I wrote was "designed to promote the subject". ("Design" would imply some conscious intent to boost the subject, which I find vaguely disquieting to be accused of doing). If anything, I'd say the somewhat unsavory controversies over Michael T. Flynn and the Leviathan gas field tilt the article somewhat to the negative. I'm not entirely sure what a "glorified CV" means, given that any biographical page is going to have some CV-elements, but I attempted to expand beyond a mere resume with an exploration of his role in the Gülenism controversy and the Mueller investigation. Cheers. PvOberstein ( talk) 04:05, 5 July 2017 (UTC) reply

Striken. K.e.coffman ( talk) 04:11, 5 July 2017 (UTC) reply

• Keep - almost certainly will continue to be a major figure in a major scandal. Bearian ( talk) 00:39, 18 July 2017 (UTC) reply

• Keep written in Nov of 2016, March, June and recent times in 2017. I'll do a little IAR and whip out my CrystalBall, and I find I agree with Bearian. L3X1 (distænt write) )evidence( 12:59, 21 July 2017 (UTC) reply
• Keep his association with Trump has got him on the national news radar, meaning he's now meeting the inclusion criteria, even if he wasn't before. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:25, 26 July 2017 (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.