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 no consensus. (non-admin closure) CAPTAIN RAJU ^(T) 18:32, 16 November 2017 (UTC) reply

Mark Llewellyn-Slade

Mark Llewellyn-Slade (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

Article appears to fail the notability guidelines for biographies. The article revolves around the fact he operates an awards firm (which reads like an advert). Strip out that and all you're left with is the fact that he has commentated on many media outlets but that's it. Vasemmistolainen ( talk) 23:08, 27 October 2017 (UTC) reply

Comments by the author of the article Mynconish ( talk) 23:32, 27 October 2017 (UTC) reply

I am looking at Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Notability (people) and argue that this subject is notable.

• WP:GNG, WP:BASIC: has received 'significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject'. Most of the sources are from major media outlets, such as the Times and CNBC -- not adverts or press releases.
• WP:NRV: sources are properly referenced, to the best of my knowledge, and are from reliable media.
• WP:SUSTAINED: He has being getting coverage for several years now. Dates of references range from 2010 to 2017.
• it is not written like an advertisement, merely listing facts which were stated directly in the sources.

Thanks for considering. Mynconish ( talk) 23:32, 27 October 2017 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. North America ¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:02, 28 October 2017 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. North America ¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:02, 28 October 2017 (UTC) reply

• Delete a non-notable PR person, his firm might be notable, but he is not. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 04:23, 5 November 2017 (UTC) reply
• Note This article was previously created by a suspected orangemoody sock and it is highly likely Mynconish is also. It's with some CUs at the moment and I will update when I can. SmartSE ( talk) 21:51, 8 November 2017 (UTC) reply

• Keep - satisfies WP:GNG, either as person or his business for being a rather scandalous issue: "selling" highest British honors. Staszek Lem ( talk) 23:30, 9 November 2017 (UTC) reply
• Keep. Much to my surprise, the references do show notability. There is often relatively little difference between the person and the firm in professions like this, but I think this would appear more objective if it were adapted to be about the firm. If this is an orangemoody sock, its a considrably better article than usual for them--and considerably better than the deleted version, which showed the usual orangemoody technique of trying to accumulate as many references as possible regardless of their quality. DGG ( talk ) 04:20, 15 November 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.