Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Craig Hanna (2nd nomination)

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 keep. (non-admin closure) TheChronium 09:30, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Craig Hanna

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails GNG Kieem trra (talk) 16:03, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Kieem trra (talk) 16:03, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Has indepth coverage in Los Angeles Times and can see coverage on other reputed sources too like NYTimes, The Hollywood Reporter, etc. Grandruskiy48 • ^Talk∕_Contribs 16:21, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:59, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete fails WP:GNG and WP:NBUSINESSPERSON. "Chief creative officer[s]" are not inherently notable. KidAd • SPEAK 23:24, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes GNG per available coverage in reliable news websites. Frigidpolarbear (talk) 15:26, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per above, has enough reliable coverage to pass WP:GNG. Rickshaw Takahashi (talk) 16:22, 22 June 2021 (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.