Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vitaliy Danylenko

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. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:10, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Vitaliy Danylenko[edit]

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

Non-notable politician?. Most of the coverage is of a school he is associated with. Does not meet WP:NPOL. Peter Rehse (talk) 16:28, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:30, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:18, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:18, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:18, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sarahj2107 (talk) 07:54, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Kiev is certainly a large and prominent enough city that its city councillors would clear WP:NPOL #2 if they were sourced properly, but it's not a position that exempts him from having to pass WP:GNG for it. This is referenced almost entirely to primary sources and YouTube videos rather than to reliable source coverage in media — and, for added bonus, it's written like somebody tried (badly) to convert his résumé into prose rather than like an actual encyclopedia article. As always, Wikipedia is not a free PR database on which every local politician is entitled to an article just because he exists; reliable source coverage must be present to support an article. Bearcat (talk) 17:56, 14 April 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.