Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Takla

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. Geschichte (talk) 20:42, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Takla[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)

Declined and rejected at AFC, holding the record for the most sushi rolls eaten in one minute is not inherently notable? Fails WP:GNG. Theroadislong (talk) 20:58, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 21:05, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not notable as nominator notes, the prospect of appropriate sources seems low. 331dot (talk) 21:08, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. The fact that the subject wrote about himself also doesn't look good. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:32, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:59, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:59, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:59, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as notability is not established. Mccapra (talk) 23:51, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete nothing notable here. --Whiteguru (talk) 06:09, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Promotional article, and the one local news article is not sufficient to meet the "multiple" part of WP:BASIC. Jumpytoo Talk 07:21, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: not notable. search on google turns out close to no items relevant to the subject. – robertsky (talk) 14:31, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --Devokewater ^(talk) 20:18, 30 December 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.