Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kevin Foreman (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 delete. Geschichte (talk) 11:47, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin Foreman

[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)

Résumé-like WP:BLP of a businessman, not reliably sourced as passing our inclusion standards for businesspeople. As always, every businessman is not automatically entitled to have a Wikipedia article just because he exists: the notability test requires some evidence of distinction, such as notable business awards or sufficient reliable source coverage to clear WP:GNG. But there are just three sources here, of which two are dead links from a limited circulation local interest magazine, and the one that comes from a solid daily newspaper is primarily about his company, and not substantively enough about Foreman to singlehandedly get him over the bar as an individual all by itself -- and the article claims nothing about him that is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to have much better sourcing than this. Bearcat (talk) 06:51, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 06:51, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 06:51, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 06:51, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: per nomination, two dead links and a passing mention in current sources. A WP:BEFORE search shows up some standard press releases and interviews but not the kind of significant coverage to pass WP:GNG. Melcous (talk) 06:57, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete does not meet any notability guidelines as they now exist. The last deletion discussion in 2005 was done when Wikipedia had much less developed or stringent notability guidelines.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:48, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Wikipedia is not LinkedIn. Mccapra (talk) 18:13, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:MILL and WP:NOTRESUME. Bearian (talk) 21:45, 20 October 2020 (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.