Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph F. Darowski

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. JohnCD (talk) 17:29, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph F. Darowski[edit]

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

The references given for Mr. Darowski still raise concerns about notability. BLP Prod was declined due to presented references, with notes that notability remained to be seen - but with the sources appearing to be primary sources, even in light of the publications, I'm a little more than vaguely concerned about WP:N in this case. I was unable to locate sources myself. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 15:37, 23 May 2012 (UTC) Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 15:37, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:21, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:22, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:22, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. GS reveals zero citations. 3 hits on Gnews. Fails both WP:PROF and WP:GNG miserably. St Anselm (talk) 20:49, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - No results on Gnews and other results in G were not notable. Thus the person is also not notable at this time. →TSU ^tp* 04:30, 30 May 2012 (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.