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.
Delete. Being the acting holder of a government civil service role is not an instant notability freebie that exempts a person from having to have any
reliable sources — but between the three footnotes and the three links that are being contextlessly linkfarmed below them, five of those six are
primary sources (press releases, directory entries, the USAID's own self-published website about itself) which are not support for notability at all, and the only one that is a reliable source is a local interest magazine covering him in the not inherently notable context of joining a consulting firm after his most potentially notable job had ended, which means it's not enough to get him over the bar all by itself as the only non-primary source in play. I'm certainly willing to reconsider this if somebody can show evidence of much more reliable source coverage about him than I've been able to find, but the sourcing present here is not good enough.
Bearcat (
talk)
17:10, 14 September 2019 (UTC)reply
Keep. I see just enough biographical material around the internet to establish notability and justify retaining the article. My recent edits have, at least partially, mitigated the problems with sources mentioned above. I would note that while these are trade publications they do have a reputation for reliability and fact-checking.
182.239.82.234 (
talk)
19:38, 16 September 2019 (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.