Talk:Martin Roll

Referring to the proposed deletion, I would like to argue that the subject conforms with both WP:GNG and WP:PROMO - WP:PROMO: The article is written in a neutral style using third-party references independent of the subject except for one case where I could not find 3rd party sources supporting his position as Distinguished Fellow at INSEAD. The other sources include CNN, BBC and Bloomberg. - WP:GNG: China Daily carried a whole back page on Mr. Roll, which I think should be sufficient for general notability requirements when combined with the fact that he is a well-received author of several books.

Tobias Tan (talk) 08:32, 26 August 2018 (UTC)


 * One source with substantial coverage (China Daily) is not sufficient for WP:GNG, regardless of how many books someone has authored. For a start, the source needs to be reliable and to be independent of its subject. I am not sure China Daily (a state-run paper) qualifies as reliable.
 * Several of the other sources are passing mentions only.
 * Given that WP:BLP applies, I'm going to remove some of the unsourced or poorly-sourced claims from the article. Let's see what remains after that. Zazpot (talk) 16:15, 26 August 2018 (UTC)


 * OK, I've now done that. Having done so, I'm inclined to the view that WP:GNG is met in this case, so I have removed the notability template. Zazpot (talk) 17:34, 26 August 2018 (UTC)