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. Cirt (
talk) 00:22, 5 April 2009 (UTC)reply
Two articles on a sixteen schoolboy and the internet news channel he has set up. Unfortunately, and despite claims in the articles, there is a distinct absence of coverage in the news or any other
reliable source of either subject. Hence, failing
WP:BIO and
WP:ORG (or any others available)
Nuttah (
talk) 16:50, 26 March 2009 (UTC)reply
The age of the kid is not relevant to the debate. Lacking sources is deleteable for articles about people of any age. -
Mgm|
(talk) 09:50, 27 March 2009 (UTC)reply
The author of both articles felt it is relevant to include references to the age and educational status of the subject, so I included this in my summary of them. At no point was this information given as a deletion criteria, so I'm not sure how you arrived at that incorrect assumption.
Nuttah (
talk) 09:59, 27 March 2009 (UTC)reply
I arrived at that conclusion because you mentioned it. Age is frequently used as a reason to "prove" someone hasn't yet lived long enough to establish anything. Your clarification is appreciated. -
Mgm|
(talk) 09:55, 31 March 2009 (UTC)reply
Delete all of the references are written by the subject, not about the subject. I failed to find any other sources about him. He has not received significant attention worthy of being recorded. Fails
WP:BIO. DeleteNews 140] also. Lack of reliable, third-party sources. Fails
WP:V. -
Atmoz (
talk) 17:01, 26 March 2009 (UTC)reply
Delete both per Atmoz's reasoning - the article does a good job of making his achievements sound impressive, but it's all very minor and obscure appearances, with no coverage in reliable sources to demonstrate notability. ~
mazcat|
c 18:20, 26 March 2009 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton |
Talk 00:00, 31 March 2009 (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.