Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/V. John Krehbiel

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. Star Mississippi 02:39, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

V. John Krehbiel[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Krehbiel was a non-notable campaign contributor who was given an ambassadorship as an award. Ambassaros are not default notable, and our sourcing on him is only name dropping and primary source reports on a meeting he had. This is not the stuff notability is made of. John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:24, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and California. Shellwood (talk) 17:00, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Nothing here to demonstrate notability. I can find sources to verify existence but not significant coverage. AusLondonder (talk) 17:19, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Among, many things, he was the chairman of the California GOP, his alleged purchase of the ambassadorship got a lot of attention, he did quite a bit more than just serve as an "ambassaro". Here's one piece of WP:SIGCOV. Meets WP:BASIC, WP:GNG. Jacona (talk) 13:39, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
comment. It seems to me I found sources more easily after leaving out the ambassadorship to Finland. He's probably better known for his many years of activism in the California GOP. Newspapers.com and Newspaperarchive.com are so full of sources, especially in the early 1960s time period. It also confuses things that he's sometimes referred to as Victor, sometimes as John, and other times as V. John.Jacona (talk) 13:56, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:47, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Thanks to Jacona for the newspaper articles they added to the article. Article clearly meets WP:BASIC. Atchom (talk) 17:15, 28 April 2022 (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.