Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kevin Covert

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. Daniel (talk) 04:34, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin Covert[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Non-notable diplomat. –Cupper52^Discuss! 14:41, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. –Cupper52^Discuss! 13:46, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 18:34, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 18:34, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep: Passes WP:POLITICIAN Kittyclassified (talk) 18:56, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Kittyclassified: Per Johnpacklambert, he is basically only an ambassador. –Cupper52^Discuss! 20:24, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete He does not pass politician notability. Diplomats are not all passing politician notability, the article does not suggest he was ever in a position that falls under the politician guidelines. Diplomats require significant coverage in reliable 3rd party sources which is lacking here.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:05, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- comment I'm still new to Wikipedia as you can probably tell, thank you for your input. I understand that he does not pass wp:politician now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kittyclassified (talk • contribs) 19:09, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Tajikistan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:45, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Korea-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:45, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kazakhstan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:46, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:46, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:46, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. We used to have a consensus that all diplomats were extended an "inherent" notability freebie regardless of their sourceability or lack thereof — but that's since been deprecated, and diplomats now qualify for articles only if they can be properly sourced over WP:GNG. That means journalistic coverage about him and his work in real media, not just "staff profile" verification on the embassy's own self-published website about itself — but the sole source here is the latter, not the former. Obviously no prejudice against recreation in the future if somebody can actually find the correct type and depth of sourcing to write much more than just that he exists. Bearcat (talk) 17:14, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Only one source so based on this doesn't meet notability. Expertwikiguy (talk) 22:45, 19 January 2021 (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.