Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charley Attali

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:22, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Charley Attali[edit]

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

I'm not going to claim that this is a WP:HOAX, but this person doesn't appear to meet WP:GNG. I've found it virtually impossible to find sources (even unreliable) about him that are not Wikipedia mirrors. This is what I've found: [1] (passing mention; possibly another individual of the same name), [2] and [3] (unreliable source). The article says, "he received a légion d'honneur", but his name is not found at List of Légion d'honneur recipients by name; this is not conclusive, but somewhat fishy nevertheless. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:53, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There's a lot of recipients of the Légion d'honneur; according to our article, there was (in 2010) 74,384 at the lowest rank and about 20,000 at higher ranks. This means he may well have it, but equally it's not a very strong indicator of notability. --Colapeninsula (talk) 14:50, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:17, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:17, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:17, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:17, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 02:47, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Sole reliable source is a passing mention of a promotion in an industry newsletter's generalized "people" section. --Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 13:09, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete A bio that's seven years old and currently has no references and a grand total of one editor (and three bots)? Neonchameleon (talk) 18:14, 3 December 2013 (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.