Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Przemysław Frasunek

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 RESULT: Keep (non-admin closure). Comments noted. Thanks for the contributions and additions to the article. Boleyn (talk) 09:44, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Przemysław Frasunek[edit]

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

tagged for notability for 5 years; couldn't confirm notability Boleyn (talk) 19:43, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 12:12, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 12:12, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 12:12, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Seven references have been added to the article since the notability tag was added. The Polish Wikipedia article provides this interview with a one-paragraph bio. Yasni has this page, which leads to sources like this which add, even if minimally, to notability. Google books shows three books with material, [1], [2], and [3]. Passes WP:N. Unscintillating (talk) 02:17, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 02:52, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It is really careless to nominate an article that has an equiv on the WP of the subjects national language, without checking there to see if there is additional information and references. This sort of work casts doubt on the degree of responsibility used of this entire series of nominations. We don't let bots do =nominations, and that should apply to actual editors whose work shows to more actual attention that a bot would have paid (and, in fact, no bot that would fail to screen for things like this, it would ever pass Bot Approval Group) DGG ( talk ) 05:02, 22 January 2013 (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.