Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Popielaski

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. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 17:10, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

John Popielaski[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)

No evidence he's a notable poet / educator as the awards are unverified and I'm unable to find sources to verify. StarM 15:28, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. StarM 15:28, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. StarM 15:28, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Connecticut-related deletion discussions. StarM 15:28, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Sadly I cannot find sourcing to support the notability of the subject here. There is a Seattle Review of Books review of one of his works but it was apparently sponsored by Popieski (i.e., not independent). Fails WP:BASIC. FOARP (talk) 15:54, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no evidence that he is notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:26, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete doesn't meet notability guidelines. Expertwikiguy (talk) 09:25, 14 November 2020 (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.