Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leo Wanta (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 --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 02:54, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Leo Wanta[edit]

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

A biography of fringey-looking allegations about a living person, tagged for a few years at this point. WP:PERP may apply, WP:BLP certainly does, and WP:TNT may as well. j⚛e decker ^talk 07:34, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:14, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:14, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:14, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:14, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:14, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - has indeed been tagged but I personally do not see the issues. The article was kept last time for the improvements and I see no difference. Improvements at an article should not be searched for during an AfD, but at the talk page. --BabbaQ (talk) 20:31, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nuke. While the Illuminati "trillions" nonsense has been removed (and the edit-warrior involved blocked), the CIA ruble-conspiracy nonsense remains as an unpalatable compromise between all or nothing. (Fast-forwarding to the present, contemporary thinking is that the KGB plundered Soviet coffers during the collapse and squirreled the funds overseas, then later used them to finance Putin's ascension; such would tend to suggest that blaming the US was propaganda.) Not one of the note and reference links lead to any easily examinable information. Push the button and put it out of its misery. Pax 10:44, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 00:35, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - despite receiving a few passing mentions in various books what do we actually know about the subject? Very little as is clear from the article. Certainly not enough to write a biography. Perhaps the information could be used in other articles but there is not enough to justify an article of his own. Seems fairly clear he has not received "significant" coverage per WP:GNG. Anotherclown (talk) 07:34, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely delete. This article is almost an attack page; it consists entirely of poorly sourced allegations. No way does it meet our BLP standards. --MelanieN (talk) 01:54, 31 January 2015 (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.