Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Davor Nikolic

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 - seems to be the general consensus. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 03:10, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Davor Nikolic[edit]

Possibly non-notable, but certainly not a speedy deletion. h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 20:12, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Claims of notability in article are borderline at best; gsearch isn't showing much in the way of notability. Delete if notability can't be shown.--Fabrictramp (talk) 01:01, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. How can the president of a national student council not be notable? Reliable sources for this are in the article. Phil Bridger (talk) 14:44, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, how important is the organization? From the look of things, probably not too much. CitiCat^♫ 15:22, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Still looks pretty important to me. President of an officially recognised advisory body to a national minister of science education and sports. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:39, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Conditional keep If the claims in the article are true, it's clear that he needs to be kept... but sources have to be tied to the claims. Right now, it is unsourced and reads like a fluff piece written by a HS student to make themselves look great. I know there are references at the end, but references do not equate to sources.Balloonman (talk) 08:01, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Why preface your statement with "if the claims in the article are true"? The claims are verified in the article by reliable sources. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:39, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment- reads like a fluff piece to me, as well. He's a footnote not an article.---Iconoclast.Horizon (talk) 18:36, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tikiwont (talk) 15:27, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep if all of the assertions are true. Verify tag? Bearian'sBooties (talk) 00:34, 26 November 2007 (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.