Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nick Spanos

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. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:35, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Spanos[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG. Non-notable JMHamo (talk) 19:28, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete as spam. Would require rebuilding in total by non-COI accounts. This is a self-serving press release. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 21:09, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 01:22, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 01:22, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Been working to clean up the article, and make it look not like a press release but an independent encyclopedic article. Bitcoin is notable and has become an industry in the last few years. The subject has significant coverage from numerous news sources and other sources, though many of those sources were excessive, so I removed them, but will review and reincorporate. The article subject meets the standards of WP:GNG. Instead of deletion of the article, we should build a better article.Bmf777 (talk) 02:20, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Working to reincorporate links and cite sources in an appropriate way.Bmf777 (talk) 05:25, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete as spam. Sourcing is spectacularly weak. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 16:41, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I see a "wall of cites" that mention him sometimes in passing, thus failing WP:SIGCOV. Bearian (talk) 17:25, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Clear WP:ANYBIO failure, no assertion of significance and no significant coverage has been added to the article in the past week.--SamHolt6 (talk) 19:18, 5 April 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.