Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tamara Kučan

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The result was Withdrawn by nominator. Michig (talk) 18:41, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tamara Kučan[edit]

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

BLP Prod tag removed with the addition of sources, but none of them look reliable, let alone constituting significant coverage. Michig (talk) 13:43, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Based on my research, she clearly passes notability guidelines. See sources like: [1][2][3][4][5][6][7] etc... SarahStierch (talk) 17:30, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have my doubts whether they are all reliable sources, and a few would probably not be considered significant coverage. --Michig (talk) 17:38, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There are references from Nezavisne Novine, a daily newspaper published in Bosnia and Herzegovina. It clearly satisfies WP:NEWSORG of WP:RS. She does pass notability guidelines, little work is needed on the article though. Hitro talk 18:06, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Serbia-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 15:19, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 15:19, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per sources found by Sarah plus one more.[8] The sources currently in the article should be deleted they are almost all unreliable book seller or primary sources. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 18:05, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, for me there are enough sources identified now to push this above the threshold, and as there have been no other editors in favour of deletion, I am withdrawing the nomination. Thanks for your efforts. --Michig (talk) 18:41, 25 November 2013 (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.