Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Julian Kabza

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. Michig (talk) 15:57, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Julian Kabza[edit]

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

Not seeing any evidence of notability. Uses Wikipedia articles and blogs posts as refs. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:25, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 18:35, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Per my comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Annex Press, I think that the press is more likely to pass notability, thought at present it doesn't. Neither have WP:RS to be found online or in databases.--Theredproject (talk) 18:47, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Deelte. Fails WP:GNG and WP:CREATIVE as for now. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 09:32, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails Notability guidelines Felicia (talk) 18:14, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no evidence of critical coverage is found in a web search. I removed a half dozen blogspost articles used as refs. Fails GNG.104.163.147.121 (talk) 18:15, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
delete big pile of conflicted, promotional editing for this page as well as Annex Press, clearly wanting to use WP to gain visibility for a subject who fails WP:BIO criteria and his associated company which fails NCORP. Jytdog (talk) 07:43, 22 March 2018 (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.