Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Waine

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. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 21:54, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Waine[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)

Does not meet notability guidelines. I was unable to find third-party sources other than routine coverage, passing mentions of his name in articles covering other topics, and his biographical information on webpages of organizations he has worked for (hired or elected). Paisarepa (talk) 21:02, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Paisarepa (talk) 21:02, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:48, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:48, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete a local school board member is not notable, not anywhere. Wikipedia has lots of articles on other non-notable people, but that is no justification for this article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:18, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Nothing here is "inherently" notable for the purposes of establishing that he qualifies for a Wikipedia article, but the sources are not getting him over WP:GNG — this is not referenced to reliable source coverage that is substantively about him, but to a giant cluster reference bomb of primary source profiles and glancing namechecks of his existence as a giver of soundbite in articles about other things. Bearcat (talk) 16:51, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete lack of reliable sources to establish WP:GNG. You can WP:REFBOMB as much as you want, but at the end of the day you can't will someone to notability. Best, GPL93 (talk) 19:02, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I think a local school board member is not notable and fail passes WP:GNG. - MA Javadi (talk) 15:29, 18 July 2019 (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.