Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Borish

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 keep. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 01:06, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Borish[edit]

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

The article fails to meet Wiki notability standards and relies heavily on primary sources (Jamescur (talk) 15:29, 21 April 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2014 April 21. —cyberbot I ^Notify_Online 15:44, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jamescur -- the nom -- is a sock of an indef-blocked user, and Jamescur has been blocked indefinitely. Epeefleche (talk) 04:18, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep. Obviously meets GNG, as a google search shows. --Epeefleche (talk) 18:13, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Epeefleche's additions to the article. Gongshow talk 23:05, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Given the extensive recent enhancements to the article by Epeefleche, I too now support keeping the article. (Jamescur (talk) 16:21, 22 April 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Jamescur -- before nominating any other articles for AfD, please do a wp:before search. If appropriate RS refs exist, don't nominate the article. The refs need not be in the article -- they only have to exist. When you nominate an article that is clearly notable, as this one was--unambiguously, it wastes the time of the community. Tx. Epeefleche

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:55, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:55, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Epeefleche. Finnegas (talk) 15:02, 27 April 2014 (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.