Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Johnson (entrepreneur)

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. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 08:12, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Johnson (entrepreneur)[edit]

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

No evidence of any notability. All sources are press releases or directory style listings. The nearest to notability is probably the Evesham Journal but even that appears to be parroting a press release. Local lad made good is fine, but it doesn'tget close to notability. Fails WP:GNG Velella ^{Velella Talk} 23:18, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 00:02, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 00:02, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 00:03, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - purely promotional. --Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 05:29, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I checked all of the refs. They are all promotional fluff, there is nothing that indicated notability. Szzuk (talk) 16:32, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:55, 4 December 2017 (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.