View text source at Wikipedia


Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kevin Patel

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. Eddie891 Talk Work 15:18, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin Patel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Student activist fails WP:GNG. KidAdSPEAK 18:54, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. ‡ Єl Cid of Valencia talk 18:59, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. ‡ Єl Cid of Valencia talk 18:59, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 21:42, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TheChronium 11:44, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America1000 12:24, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep There's sufficient independent reliable sources with significant coverage to meet GNG
Source assessment table
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?
~ Interview Yes Yes ~ Partial
~ Interview Sponsored content Yes ? Unknown
Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes
In the Know (same as the Yahoo Finance link)
Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes No passing mention No
Yes Yes Yes Yes
Error: a source must be specified ? Unknown
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Clearly enough coverage in reliable sources to meet GNG Qwaiiplayer (talk) 13:07, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Comment: Just some caveats. The Times-Standard source is only a passing mention and the profile in GreenBiz doesn't really count as coverage. But everything else checks out. — BriefEdits (talk) 02:38, 4 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.