Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pearce Robinson

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. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 16:24, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pearce Robinson

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

No sourced evidence of notability. Unable to find mention in reliable sources. Refer also to Talk:Pearce Robinson.Begoon ^talk 08:45, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

see also: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PNM Abroad Begoon ^talk 09:56, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Pure vanity page. A student that hasn't done anything notable, yet. I can't find a reliable source about him. I was going thru the refs and deleting them before noticing the AfD. All the refs that deal with him never mention him and did not back up what was being said in the article. Bgwhite (talk) 09:05, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There does appear to be one attempt to establish notability here [1], but basically that amounts to: "He sent a letter to a Minister, and got a reply from a subordinate". I'm not sure if we'd see that as a reliable source, but certainly it's not significant, so hardly matters. Begoon ^talk 09:41, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Nothing here that meets WP:BIO. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 11:56, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete could you forward the page to a sandbox for relevant changes to be made (Distributor2012) (talk)

Again you guys have no clue. Why don't you contact the Hon. Leader of the Opposition Dr. Keith Rowley to find out a little bit more. Stop deleting pages for no reason.(DavidHanity (talk) 12:40, 11 January 2012 (UTC))[reply]

Comment David, unfortunately, it seems like it is you who has no clue about how things work here. Such a phone call would accomplish nothing if there are no reliable sources. Ever seen an encyclopedia tell you something and then "source" it to "so and so told me on the phone"? I've put a "welcome" template on your user page. Please have a look at some of our guidelines and policies linked in there. It will help you understand why things have to be as they are. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 13:46, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:36, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Caribbean-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:37, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:37, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Nothing in news archives, no independent sources, fails all points of WP:POLITICIAN. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:38, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as utterly and completely failing WP:V. None of the references in the article mention his name. Claims of "significant impact", "worked with" and "involved with" are not the foundations which WP:N and WP:V were built upon. Dennis Brown (talk) 20:25, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Don't Delete ref http://pnmabroad.org/about-pnm-abroad/ (DavidHanity (talk) 23:03, 11 January 2012 (UTC))— DavidHanity (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Your link is what we call a "primary source". It is meaningless because it was written by HIM. By the foundation he is said to have founded. Of course they are going to wax poetic about him, he owns the domain name. WP:N requires more, that the reference be by a WP:RS that isn't connected to the subject. Dennis Brown (talk) 23:43, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - clearly of insufficient notability to warrant an article. -- Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 16:23, 14 January 2012 (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.