Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Geoff Banjavich

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. j⚛e decker ^talk 19:50, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Geoff Banjavich

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

The WP:SPA creator seems to be asserting notability on grounds of actor, writer, inventor and entrepreneur. I couldn't establish that he meets this criteria on any of these grounds, or all put together. Boleyn (talk) 09:18, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. -Fimatic (talk | contribs) 02:37, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -Fimatic (talk | contribs) 02:37, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I found this article about him but there's not enough coverage for WP:GNG. He also falls drastically short of WP:NACTOR and WP:CREATIVE. Tchaliburton (talk) 02:46, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -Fimatic (talk | contribs) 02:49, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:33, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:33, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

None of the occupations in question is a notability freebie under which a person gets to keep a Wikipedia article just because they can be demonstrated to exist — they all have specific markers of achievement that have to be passed for a person to earn coverage on here, and absent that the only other path to an article is to add enough reliable sources to get them over WP:GNG. But neither of those conditions has been satisfied in this instance, and as written this article is dancing on the edge of being an outright advertisement for his business endeavours. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 18:16, 13 December 2014 (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.