Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emmanuel Broutin

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. ✗plicit 14:33, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Emmanuel Broutin[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)

Borderline on notability. Might be notable, but I think not. UtherSRG (talk) 11:44, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sportspeople, France, and Spain. UtherSRG (talk) 11:44, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hard to say. I found a copy of the first reference (Vigeant, Arsène : Un Maître d'Armes sous la Restauration - Paris - 1883) here: [1], but could only find one reference to "Broutin", and it looks like a passing reference. I couldn't locate the other general references. The French and Spanish Wikipedias have a couple more references, which I also couldn't locate. Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 12:29, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I can't find references to him in the BnF Gallica database, nor in Gscholar or Gbooks. Oaktree b (talk) 13:56, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:59, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:21, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I think the references that have been added to the article are sufficient to demonstrate notability. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 05:55, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Unless we can actually verify that any of the sources contain SIGCOV, the article shouldn't be kept... JoelleJay (talk) 17:43, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No evidence that any of the sources contain significant coverage. Avilich (talk) 14:14, 7 July 2023 (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.