Draft talk:GeorgeNotFound

"Draft:GeorgeNotFound" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Draft:GeorgeNotFound and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 16 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Sr. Knowthing ¿señor? 03:18, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Explanation on sourcing and notability
Hi new page patrollers and other editors! Due to the turbulent history of this page, you may be eager to delete this article at the mere sight of this page entering mainspace. But before starting an AfD, please read this explanation.

Much work has been done to improve the article in recent months; the page at the time of the May 2022 AfC rejection was in a completely different state than the page now. There have been two main issues historically: poor sourcing and insufficient demonstrated notability. To address the former: all citations in the article are from reliable sources, demonstrated through inclusion on WP:RS/PS, WP:RS/N, or WP:VG/RS. To address the latter: many of these sources are independent and demonstrate significant coverage, clearly demonstrating that the subject now passes WP:GNG. See below the source assessment table, which features just some of the sources contributing toward GNG.

As for why this page was rejected through AfC this month, you can read and the subsequent review discussion yourself. All concerns made by the reviewers were either addressed in the discussion or remedied in later edits. However, at some point reviewers were just unwilling to engage in discussion, — so I am following their suggestion.

If you are considering an AfD, I first encourage you to reevaluate the article as it is today. BappleBusiness[talk] 04:25, 11 January 2023 (UTC)