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.
Reason
StNicksRocks (
talk) 06:56, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
The article reads like an advertisement. It is not written in a NPOV and does not cite sufficient 3rd party material to verify the veracity of its content.reply
Keep. I've done some cleaning up and toning down - and updating. He has further world records after those mentioned. I am surprised by how much coverage there is in the (online) press; I have added some, will look for more, and I believe he meets GNG.
Yngvadottir (
talk) 18:13, 27 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep -- Obviously. The article meets
WP:GNG and
WP:BIO criteria. Any issues with language, style or sourcing have been well-addressed by Yngvadottir. (Nominator should have read
WP:BEFORE and have tagged this article for improvement rather than submitted for AFD). —
CactusWriter (talk) 15:30, 28 March 2014 (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.