Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adam Kowalik


 * 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 deckertalk 02:07, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Adam Kowalik

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Deprodded by anon. I stand by my prod rationale: "This biography does not seem to pass the requirements of Notability (biographies): no significant achievements, no significant coverage in mainstream, reliable sources." See pl:Wikipedia:Poczekalnia/biografie/2014:05:26:Adam Kowalik (pallotyn) for Polish language discussion, and I'd appreciate it if a Portuguese speaker could start one at the pr wiki. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 04:24, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
 * delete no evidence for particular notability. -No.Altenmann >t 05:34, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:14, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:14, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:14, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:14, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:15, 29 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Weak delete. I have no idea how to judge the impact of his work on canon law, but the article makes him appear to be a lower-level judge (compare WP:POLITICIAN: U.S. state supreme court or federal appeals court judge might be enough, anything lower probably not) and parish priest (again: bishop maybe enough, lower no). Notability has not been demonstrated. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:52, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
 * All regular US district court judges have been deemed notable and have articles. What happens with state court judges is a bit different, but it seems our rule is that federal judges in the general sense of the term are all notable. How that applies here I am not sure.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:07, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. Little impact on scholarship per GS. Xxanthippe (talk) 07:19, 2 June 2014 (UTC).
 * 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.