Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Derrick Haro

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. —SpacemanSpiff 18:14, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Derrick Haro[edit]

Derrick Haro (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A Canadian second-tier diplomat who doesn't satisfy WP:BIO. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:22, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:51, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:51, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:52, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • strong delete also fails WP:DIPLOMAT. nothing in gnews. LibStar (talk) 00:58, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Undecided. The article is written as a WP:MEMORIAL, so needs cleanup. There does seem to be some significant coverage in reliable sources. The subject is the focus of this news article[1], and his death is reported here[2]. Given the age, there are likely to be more sources which aren't available on-line. Pburka (talk) 01:27, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. That's not significant coverage. The Advocate article is about Texas-Canadian trade, and the Star just has a brief notice about his death. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:34, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • According to WP:GNG, "Significant coverage" means that sources address the subject directly in detail, so no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention but it need not be the main topic of the source material. I think that these both qualify. Pburka (talk) 03:31, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm leaning towards deletion. Although I easily found one example of significant coverage on GNews, this article fails the multiple reliable sources test. Pburka (talk) 02:15, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • ?. Why is this included in the academics section of AfD? Xxanthippe (talk) 01:30, 6 September 2013 (UTC).[reply]
    • Because he had a faculty position at UVic? But that's not what he's notable for, clearly. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:23, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - this person clearly fails basic notability tests. There is hardly any real news about him; there is very little about his career as a minor Diplomat or as an academic. A filtered search found 27 results (not the 1600-odd that Google expected), and most of those were vacuous (copied from WP, etc). One or two scraps of news about routine minor diplomatic activity do not make for notability. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:42, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 14:08, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Does not appear to be sufficiently notable as an academic, diplomat, nor as a victim-of-mysterious-accident. —David Eppstein (talk) 02:03, 9 September 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Derrick_Haro&oldid=1076625551"