Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stan burdman

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. Rjd0060 (talk) 15:13, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stan burdman[edit]

Article was deleted as A7 but DRV overturned holding that nobility was asserted. However, notability is not demonstrated, and no independent reliable sources are present so deletion is still appropriate unless they can be found. Eluchil404 (talk) 01:22, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unless reliable sources can be located and incorporated into the article. I supported overturning the speedy delete when the question went to DRV because process is important, but this is a BLP and no reliable sources are presented in the article at present. DickClarkMises (talk) 01:34, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, guy with a webpage, a podcast, and some videos on YouTube. No assertion of notability, was a perfectly valid A7 speedy in my opinion. --Stormie (talk) 04:28, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:V Annette46 (talk) 04:40, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. —Dravecky (talk) 05:33, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Meets WP:V, but not WP:N. I can't find anything that makes me think he's notable. Hobit (talk) 06:16, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete zero Google news hits on "Stan Burdman". Fails WP:BIO and WP:V--Rtphokie (talk) 13:28, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Geogre's law. Stifle (talk) 14:13, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not notable, and barely verifiable. AlexTiefling (talk) 14:21, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, clear failure of WP:N and more specifically WP:BIO due to lack of reliable sources. The complete lack of reliable-source coverage as far as I can see renders this apparently unsourceable. ~ mazca ^{t | c} 20:59, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete with a clear forecast of snow, as I suspected all along. (Thanks, Stormie, DickCM, and others on both sides of the DRV.) --Orange Mike | Talk 16:54, 19 August 2008 (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.