Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Martin Chilcott

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 23:49, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Martin Chilcott[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)

Insufficient independent coverage of the subject on Google News and in the article to pass WP:GNG. Uhooep (talk) 06:44, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Education, Environment, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:50, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:01, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I checked over the sources, and they are completely insufficient. The first one is to the Store Locator page of Carphone Warehouse - not to an article that is a reference for the statement that this reference was used for. The next reference was to findarticles.com which did not establish anything. The next two articles were to Place Group pages at www.place-group.com - which was the subject's own company, and should not be the sole reference about the company - not independent sources. The next article titled "The World's largest sustainability network defines..." is pointing to a press release, not an independent source. The final reference to a page at The Guardian is reflecting an error page, and the only copy in the Internet Archive likewise reflects a cached copy of the error page as well. None of the sources cited were sufficient as reference citations, much less as sources to establish notability sufficient to merit a Wikipedia article.WmLawson (talk) 04:05, 1 April 2024 (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 14:17, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As per nom. Reading through the article itself, large sections also seems to have a promotional tone, particularly in the Career, 2degrees and Personal life sections. ArkHyena (talk) 17:40, 4 April 2024 (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.