Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Texas

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Texas. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Texas|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Texas. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to US.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Texas/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Texas

Christian Duarte

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

Subject does not appear to meet the WP:SPORTSCRIT due to a lack of WP:SIGCOV. Let'srun (talk) 00:08, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, California, and Oregon. Let'srun (talk) 00:08, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 00:37, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:14, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I find no sources for this soccer player. What's in the article are primary only. Appears to still be in the minor leagues, so might not have attained enough notice for more media coverage. Oaktree b (talk) 02:15, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTSCRIT. No significant coverage in independent sources. The player doesn’t seem notable enough for a separate article. Pridemanty (talk) 06:25, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 12:01, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 12:04, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Murder of Andreen McDonald

AfDs for this article:

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

Last discussion (three months ago) was no consensus. This is still not notable per WP:NEVENT, the coverage is not in depth or particularly sustained (it popped up again during the trial, but then fell off again after). PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:48, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Events, and Texas. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:48, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm on the fence for this one. I found a few local sources, which seem to have been covered in the previous discussion. The only other one I found was an article at A&E, but it's promotional for their TV show and of questionable reliability. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 01:35, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Per nomination "Yeah, it came up again during the trial but then faded out after that. I don’t think people need to keep talking about it forever for it to matter. The fact that both the incident and the trial got enough attention and were covered by reliable sources shows it’s definitely notable." Afro 📢Talk! 12:12, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Margaret Erin Fleming

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

Subject is not notable. Upon searching up the subject, no reliable, independent sources can be found. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 20:27, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and Texas. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 20:27, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Women. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:32, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of tornado-related deaths at schools

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

Fails WP:NLIST, as much as I love tornado-related lists. E_F⁵ 21:49, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:56, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:56, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Alabama, Colorado, Florida, Georgia (U.S. state), Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:01, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:04, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per NLIST and WP:SALAT for being too specific. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:35, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I was thinking ever since the new article came out that this one was weirdly written and now is redundant. Merge to List of schools struck by tornadoes, which covers an overlapping and broader topic and doesn't have an exceptionally WP:SYNTH-y section of original analysis. Departure– (talk) 15:16, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't even say that list meets WP:NLIST, but that'd be for another discussion. — E_F⁵ 16:16, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Fails WP:NLIST, although I wouldn't be opposed to a merge as Departure suggested, it's an overlapping topic and it might have been better for List of schools struck by tornadoes anyway. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 20:26, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per its falling short of WP:NLIST. A proper merge or redirect article could be a good summary for this discussion too. Unicorbia (talk) 14:07, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gregory Scott Brown

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

A psychiatrist whose closest claim to notability is as a 'celebrity doctor', but the the cited sources seem tangential and insufficient to provide notability. Yoga advocacy is noted, but there is no evidence of impact of this advocacy: for example, their only publication on this topic (Brown, 2018) has no citations. Doesn't reach WP:NACADEMIC: noting H-index of 4, based on 6 publications, with no named chair. Klbrain (talk) 13:00, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The Chron source is about an oboe recital, not really notable. I can only find interviews [1] or articles he's written, as the ones used for sourcing now in the article. Nothing strictly about this individual. Oaktree b (talk) 13:38, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Texas. Shellwood (talk) 13:59, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Adjunct professor with a low citation count that doesn't seem to pass any of the WP:NPROF criteria. Couldn't find anything about this person's published work in magaziens that would be enough to pass WP:NAUTHOR or WP:GNG. nf utvol (talk) 15:18, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No pass of WP:Prof. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:23, 7 April 2025 (UTC).[reply]
Delete: I couldn't find anything to suggest that he meets WP:PROF. He clearly fails criteria 2 through 8, with no indication of significant awards, editorial positions, or substantial impact in the field. There doesn't appear to be any highly cited or impactful works that would help establish notability.
Delete per nom. Gheus (talk) 20:58, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Isberner

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

Subject does not appear to have the needed WP:SIGCOV to meet the WP:SPORTSCRIT. Let'srun (talk) 22:01, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, Brazil, Delaware, Louisiana, and Texas. Let'srun (talk) 22:01, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unable to find any secondary sources to support notability. GalacticVelocity08 (talk) 22:48, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 07:50, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
yes, Fails Wikipedia's notability guidelines. There's little to no coverage in reliable, independent sources beyond basic stats. No evidence of significant impact or lasting recognition. Not enough for a standalone article. Krishnpriya123 (talk) 16:09, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Brief pro career [2], not meeting sporting notability and sourcing is not enough to even create a stub article. Article now is mostly primary sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 15:18, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 17:28, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 17:30, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Seconding WP:GNG. Brief pro career. Raskuly (talk) 23:42, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, we have a GNG rule for a reason, as well as WP:SPORTSCRIT with greater detail and specific guidelines for a sports figure, which notability is not met for in this case. Iljhgtn (talk) 20:58, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Guy Schwartz

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

Lack of any notability whatsoever - prior print sources were bogus and unverifiable. Biased and POV statements littered throughout the article and the subject has flaunted said article on social media (facebook) many times. Large chunk of contributions to the article are from suspicious anonymous IP addresses that have only edited that page, as well as Guy Schwartz's own wikipedia account. Subject has not established notability and this page should be deleted. Brandonac4473 (talk) 09:08, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Politicians, Journalism, Television, New Jersey, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Well, the article is unsourced, so that's of no help. I don't find anything for sourcing. Could be notable, but the lack of any kind of sourcing isn't helpful. Could be a hoax or an LLM article for all I know. Could likely speedy this. Oaktree b (talk) 14:47, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment is the nominator the ip who removed the references which are shown here on the basis that they were bogus such as the Houston Press?. However, I did find this piece in the Houston Press here so maybe they weren't as bogus as is claimed, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 21:59, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep also found these other Houston Press articles about him here, here,here, here, here, and here. Going by this evidence the other references removed such as Billboard may be genuine as well, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 22:21, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, yes I am the user who called the Houston press in an attempt to independently verify the articles he cited on his own wikipedia page - none of those print articles existed according to them.

Your first link to houston press is talking about MARTY schwartz, not Guy Schwartz - Marty is a youtuber with infinitely more notoriety.

Of the rest of the articles you linked, guy schwartz is the main subject of only TWO of those articles - and not to mention, they are all by the same publication. Which per WP:GNG - "Multiple publications from the same author or organization are usually regarded as a single source for the purposes of establishing notability."

The only cited source within the entire article that I could find that had any direct ties to guy schwartz was yet another Houston Press article from 2007 entitled "South By Due East↵Racket heads for Austin as Guy Schwartz and M. Martin bicker over the history of a local festival" and it was incorrectly cited for a statement that claimed they have been running said festival since 2003 - which the article mentions nowhere. Thus why I pulled it from the article.

Perhaps Guy Schwartz could write a new wikipedia page about himself with info from those two articles that he is the subject of, appropriately citing things that are within those articles for the information therein. But the article as it stands is a plethora of wild unsupported claims - such as claims of a 2016 presidential campaign that are based in nothing but fantasy. Claiming he toured with Duran Duran, Todd Rundgren and Huey Lewis.

If Guy Schwartz was truly notable, then one would think he would manage more than a couple articles in Houston Press about his band. Brandonac4473 (talk) 09:17, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the Billboard references I confirmed were bogus through online archives of those issues he claimed he was in.

It also doesnt change the fact that none of those articles you linked were cited within the page. Had they been, this may have been a different story. Albeit the issue still stands: Per WP:GNG "Multiple publications from the same author or organization are usually regarded as a single source for the purposes of establishing notability." Brandonac4473 (talk) 10:12, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response, I've removed the Marty Schwartz reference. Agree more sources are required, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 19:25, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you agree more sources are required for notability, then please consider changing your recommendation to delete. Brandonac4473 (talk) 03:12, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kindly remove the bold in your request as it might be considered a !vote and it is assumed that nominators are generally in favour of deletion and cannot !vote. ◇Not sure it is appropriate to ask a voter to change their suggestion the way you did, but maybe that’s not an issue. -Mushy Yank. 18:22, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies - unbolded that word.

They can obviously do whatever they want, but I figured asking them to reconsider their vote would be appropriate considering that they now agree with the basis of my issue with the article to begin with - that more sources are needed. Brandonac4473 (talk) 20:20, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not yet fully convinced that additional sources do not exist so am sticking with my keep vote pending further evidence, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 21:18, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Houston Chronicle has bits of coverage about him; including this presenting him as "an icon of the Houston scene". -Mushy Yank. 00:11, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(and same media: https://www.chron.com/entertainment/music/article/guy-schwartz-new-jack-hippies-1979508.php (based on an interview)+ or this (short/similar to first and with similar appraisal, "a Houston institution"); this interview at Rag Radio (with an extensive presentation) (see WP:INTERVIEWS, an essay) can serve is this is kept to expand and verify. So that imv, he might meet one or two of the inclusion criteria as defined in the guideline about WP:Notability (music), namely:

"Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself"

(excludes interviews) and/or, more likely:

"Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city"

Houston is a city. GS, at 73, seems to be listed among the most prominent Americana musicians of its local scene. Ergo (weak) keep? If kept, the article, currently tag-bombed, should be cleaned up. -Mushy Yank. 00:31, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do any of these articles you linked support the plethora of claims made throughout the article?

This is why my attempts to verify them were so exhaustive. There are no credible sources for him having ran a 2016 presidential campaign, no credible sources for having toured with Duran Duran or Huey Lewis.

He might've passed WP:GNG if those articles were properly cited within the article but they weren't cited at all.

And Houston Chronicle calling his band an "icon" is a stretch particularly when their latest "music video" has 48 views on youtube. link

Houston Chronicle is open for business btw for paid promotions. Brandonac4473 (talk) 04:38, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Even if notability is established, WP:NDELETE still says a wikipedia article must cite sources for whatever information it presents - regardless of notability.

The entirety of the article is filled with unverifiable claims. He still doesn't pass WP:GNG in my opinion but the criteria to delete the page has absolutely been met per WP:NDELETE even if he is truly notable. Brandonac4473 (talk) 09:16, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to fix it, then and remove everything you think is inappropriate (please do not WP:BLANK the page, though). As for the idea that a page about a "truly notable subject" should (or even could) be deleted because the page has no sources cited, although sources exist (and in the case of an/this AfD, especially if sources are presented!!!!), I am very sorry, but: ABSOLUTELY NOT!

Just read Wikipedia:Notability#Notability_is_based_on_the_existence_of_suitable_sources,_not_on_the_state_of_sourcing_in_an_article, which is a WP:guideline. "WP:NDELETE" is an essay (="the advice or opinions of one [..] Wikipedia contributor[s]", not a policy or guideline). You are totally free to cite it and it is not a problem, but it has little, if any, weight as an argument to delete a page. (I completely disagree with that essay, personally, and find it is full of wild and reckless assertions). Also, articles that do not pass WP:GNG but meet a given WP:SNG may be kept, depending on the case. Best, -Mushy Yank. 10:43, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, so you disagree with WP:NDELETE, thats fine.

Do you think Guy Schwartz meets WP:SIGCOV?

A brief mention in a list of other houston musicians seems like a trivial mention. Brandonac4473 (talk) 22:09, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: fails WP:N. The phoney 2016 presidential campaign with no citations to back it up says everything to me. Nominator appears to have tried to independently verify the print articles thoroughly. My own searching of “Guy Schwartz” on the internet doesnt produce much either, except for his wiki page. Non-notable. Brenae wafato (talk) 21:56, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment found this here about his supposed 2016 Presidential bid but he doesn't seem to have made the ballot according to official records, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 19:07, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

so this guy connected with me on a site called ome.tv and one of the first things he told me to do was check his wikipedia page, trying to tell me he was famous. i googled him and literally this was the only thing i found on him. given that... seems like he shouldnt have a wikipedia page LOL. he has no followers or coverage anywhere else.

i saw the notification at the top of his article inviting me to leave an opinion..

so i'd say delete but i also dont know how wikipedia works. but this guy is not famous or notable and definitely shouldnt have a wikipedia page if he just goes around telling random people to check it out and has no real coverage anywhere else lmao. 24.27.40.108 (talk) 05:03, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Need more input from other experienced editors
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:49, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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. ✗plicit 14:17, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sheikhani Group of Companies

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

Fails WP:NCORP, sources are not reliable and independent. GrabUp - Talk 08:04, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Pakistan, and United States of America. GrabUp - Talk 08:22, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:35, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Collapsed content from prior to semi-protection.

What do u mean they arent reliable there are so many reliabe sources in it. 2600:4040:2012:DD00:5DB4:CFC1:D03F:EE02 (talk) 14:54, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this article shouldn't be deleted because the company and owner both are notable. WP:N Zaidtessori (talk) 15:20, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This is does not make any sense. There are sources listed above and the page had sources and add on's that it seems others are deleting. does being a buissnessman & constable in the us not make a person notable. wow 2600:4040:2012:DD00:5DB4:CFC1:D03F:EE02 (talk) 15:02, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this article has many reliable sources in it. i have seen wikipedia articles with less than 4 unreliable sources and you guys didnt delete them. this article is about a company owned by a notable person named ali sheikhani. Ahmadalir (talk) 15:07, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep article is notable & falls under the criteria of notability WP:N Davidmathew11123 (talk) 15:23, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep sources look notable to me. sources like news channels are notable like these https://katychristianmagazine.com/2023/12/06/meet-police-officer-and-self-made-businessman-ali-sheikhani-republican-candidate-for-fort-bend-county-constable-pct-3/ https://uspto.report/TM/98158126/FTK20230830173009/ there are a lot more sources that are reliable and notable so this article shouldn't be deleted. Mrbeast221 (talk) 15:30, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Sources are reliable and independent. Janghirbutt (talk) 15:33, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Draftspace: Brother instead can someone it to a draft so i will work on it and then submit it for afc draft. 2600:4040:2012:DD00:5DB4:CFC1:D03F:EE02 (talk) 15:41, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

keep this article shouldn’t be deleted as it has some reliable sources instead it should get the tag of more citations needed. 2600:4040:2012:DD00:F953:498E:34F9:B100 (talk) 17:42, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Article has a few Reliable Sources. Article can rely on those sources. shouldn’t get deleted instead get a tag about needing more citations. 2600:4040:2012:DD00:9:9C:6201:76B0 (talk) 17:48, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Has reliable citations shouldn’t get deleted. 2600:4040:2012:DD00:441:F5D2:FB86:14FC (talk) 17:50, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Sources look independent and reliable. 2600:4040:2012:DD00:856C:CC4D:E3C6:CFB9 (talk) 17:53, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This article Falls under notability it shouldn’t be deleted. 2600:4040:2012:DD00:F4C7:2A79:AC6D:4C0A (talk) 17:56, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Article has independent and reliable sources . Falls under notability WP:NCORP 141.156.233.91 (talk) 18:02, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying my best to improve it. i dont know what the decision would be but i will try my best thanks, 141.156.233.91 (talk) 18:03, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

Delete: Ridiculous amount of ref-bombing of nearly all useless references - scrapers, junk sites, passing mentions. The very few that have even moderately indepth coverage are churnalism or from regional sources only. Ravensfire (talk) 19:56, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. There are a few mentions and press releases (churnalism) but none of them cover this group in detail beyond routine coverage. Fails WP:NCORP. Veldsenk (talk) 05:27, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Although they are "hatted", it seems problematic to discount 13 editors arguing to Keep or Draftify in favor of 2 editors advocating Deletion. Is there any indications all of these IPs are socks?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:36, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: Yes, all of these are sock accounts and have been blocked. See the SPI for details. GrabUp - Talk 06:41, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, well now that the sock farm has been purged, after review, allow me to add my determination of a Delete !vote to the roster here. Only routine coverage does not meet GNG. Iljhgtn (talk) 21:19, 10 April 2025 (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.

Vasu Raja

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

Lacks notable, verifiable sources proving his subject meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines for a person. Hka-34 Jyli (talk) 09:06, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Hka-34 Jyli (talk) 09:06, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:26, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Aviation, Maryland, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:38, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Vasu Raja was the high-profile architect of the world's largest airline's commercial strategy including a unique take on distribution for two years before being forced out and continues to be a notable industry expert. He has sufficient coverage to meet the general notability guideline and curious whether a search was done before nomination. Avgeekamfot (talk) 16:58, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 10:35, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

weak keep: Seems to be written by a Senior Contributor (which I think is a staff position), Forbes [3]. Not an extensive amount of sourcing, but there is some. Oaktree b (talk) 13:48, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I think notability was just temporary based on reading few sources from google search. WP:NTEMP Asteramellus (talk) 21:45, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- ...did you read NTEMP? Notability is not temporary. If it was notable, ever, it is notable. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:51, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The independent and secondary coverage (such as this piece in the WSJ) focuses on his firing from American Airlines, making this a case of WP:BLP1E. The rest of the coverage of him separate from his turbulent tenure at AA is non-independent, primary and/or trivial. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:27, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not notable at all. Just a person who got a job. Reads lika a resume. Ramos1990 (talk) 03:25, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 04:04, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions (WP:PROD)

Dallas Contemporary (via WP:PROD on 3 November 2024)
KDDM (via WP:PROD on 3 November 2024)