Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ashra Kwesi


 * 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. Cirt (talk) 06:55, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Ashra Kwesi

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable biography of professor. Sources don't establish any notability. Has been PRODed and de-PRODed already, so AfD raised. Oscarthecat (talk) 06:41, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:02, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:PROF. Niteshift36 (talk) 16:28, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete No indication of notability and seems to be a spammy ad for tours. ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:36, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * My concerns have been addressed. I don't see much for notability, but if a well respected editor thinks there's cause to keep it I'm inclind to give them the benefit of the doubt. ChildofMidnight (talk) 04:53, 16 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment He seems to have some significant news coverage in many countries Google news. I don't care enough to clean up the article, but I did a search a couple of days ago when I was adding categories. -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 21:45, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:00, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. After an extensive search using various tools, such as Worldcat, Google and various academic databases, I could not find enough to establish notability under WP:PROF criterion #1 (significant impact in scholarly discipline). However, based on the news coverage of the subject’s work (see hits uncovered by SpacemanSpiff), I would argue that the subject either meets or is close to meeting WP:PROF criterion #7 (substantial impact outside academia in academic capacity). Even if the subject was found to not pass WP:PROF, he seems to pass the more general WP:BIO.--Eric Yurken (talk) 01:22, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. I edited the article to give it a fighting chance here. As correctly noted by ChildofMidnight, the previous version read like an ad for the subject’s tour firm.--Eric Yurken (talk) 02:50, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. WP:FRINGE appears more relevant than WP:PROF for this one. I don't see the extensive referencing in major publications that would be needed to pass WP:FRINGE. —David Eppstein (talk) 08:53, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete I just don't see it. I don't think we should invoke WP:PROF criterion #7 unless it's clear that the subject is a professor and I can't discern that from the sources. WP:FRINGE does appear a better criteria, and with all respect, he's on the fringe of the fringe.... - Vartanza (talk) 04:03, 16 June 2009 (UTC).
 * Delete Certainly fails WP:Prof and does not appear to have notability otherwise. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:19, 18 June 2009 (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.