Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrius Puksas

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. Sandstein 07:49, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Andrius Puksas[edit]

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

WP:BLP, completely unsourced except for some press release blurbs on the website of the university where he got his law degree (i.e. invalid primary sources that cannot confer WP:GNG), of a lawyer with no particular claim of notability for much more than the fact of his existence. Further, this is written as a résumé rather than an encyclopedia article — but Wikipedia is not LinkedIn, so that's not the type of article that anybody gets to have on here regardless of their notability or lack thereof. Delete, unless somebody with Lithuanian language skills can salvage it with a stronger notability claim and better sourcing than has been shown here. Bearcat (talk) 15:39, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There are only two assertions that might have prevented application of WP:A7 deletion: "Director of Institute of Lithuanian Scientific Society" and "Head of Social Innovations Doctoral School". But for those positions to confer notability, they would have to be of substantial significance themselves. Are they? Anyway, there are few Google hits for him, though I'm cautious about taking that number straight up because names are declined in Lithuanian so there could be more instances of his name in other case forms. —Largo Plazo (talk) 15:51, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:21, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lithuania-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:21, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:21, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, agree with nom. Renata (talk) 04:38, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:14, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Non-notable 30-year-old lawyer. FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 22:23, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - as per nom and above editors. Searches turned up no in-depth coverage to show they meet the notability criteria. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:37, 16 October 2015 (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.