Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chris Boswell (real estate agent)


 * 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. Also eligible for G5 deletion, first block in the sockfarm at Sockpuppet investigations/Orlaw66 was 19 July. MER-C 18:32, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Chris Boswell (real estate agent)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

No indication of notability. Sources provided are press release types or articles where he is mentioned but not discussed. Claim to notability seems to be that he sold the most expensive house in Dubai but I don't believe that, in itself, is sufficient to meet WP:BIO. ... disco spinster   talk  19:47, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. ...  disco spinster   talk  19:47, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Arab Emirates-related deletion discussions. ...  disco spinster   talk  19:47, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:54, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
 * @Discospinster You do not that Chris Boswell sold the highest priced residential home?. Where is your proof he didn't? Please provide with a counter point. How can Arabian Business, Gulf News, The National and Khaleej Times the most reputable Journalists in Dubai all be wrong? Information on the highest sale prices are pulled from the Dubai Land Department database and REIDIN.com logged by the agent that sold the property. I should know I worked in the Industry for 17 years. O66 (talk) 20:00, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I didn't say I don't believe that he sold the home. I said I believe that it's not sufficient to meet notability criteria. ... disco spinster   talk  20:01, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
 * "notability seems to be that he sold the most expensive house in Dubai but I don't believe that".... I'll be adding more citation links in 24 hours to support this. I am baffled as why many of the "editors" on here clearly do not take the time to read the articles included. O66 (talk) 20:09, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
 * @Discospinster Furthermore, being asked to be interviewed because of your in depth knowlege on the Dubai real estate market or be the main subject of an interview/bio piece in the UAE due to your achievements and contribution to the market surely qualifies for notability. I strongly appeal the decision to delete and respectfully request another Editor to kindly take the time to review each article please. O66 (talk) 20:16, 2 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete - I'm not convinced selling a US$50m property in Dubai is a claim of notability, there's probably dozens of houses sold in London alone for more than that. Nor do I see being involved in the sale of US$1.16 Billion's worth of property in total as a claim for notability. (To put all this into perspective, Mukesh Ambani's home in Mumbai is valued at over $1 billion) --John B123 (talk) 21:00, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm suprised at this response considering the Freehold market is only 20 years old in Dubai with palm island homes less than 13 years old. Mukesh Ambani's home price is completley irrelevant and suprised at this example. Why has a Dubai property not sold for more than US$50m in six years? O66 (talk) 21:12, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Furthermore, No home in history has ever sold for over a Billion USD. This is a terrible example. You make it sound as if selling over a Billion Dollars worth of real estate is an easy task. O66 (talk) 21:15, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not saying it's easy, just that it's not notable. --John B123 (talk) 22:18, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
 * --John B123 My issue is that other real estate agents (US) have been included with career sales equal to or under with similar press coverage. Why my subject is nominated for deletion is confusing. Your comment regarding "Dozens of London homes selling for that amount" is completely uncorrelated. The Dubai freehold market is 19 years old! London is a market that is hundreds of years old. Selling a home of that value unsurpassed for over six years in the UAE is worthy of press in the domestic media and I'm disappointed editors are not reviewing or re-searching the subject matter in more depth before proposed deletion. O66 (talk) 22:26, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
 * My comment about London prices is entirely relevant in that on a world scale, a US$50m house is not exceptional. Even if it were the most expensive house in the world, it still wouldn't make him notable. He is obviously good at his job, but so are thousands of other people. --John B123 (talk) 22:58, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Edit to add, in your reply to above, you asked for another editor to review notability. I've done that and can't see enough notability to warrant an article. --John B123 (talk) 23:03, 2 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete. The price of the house is not relevant. As John B123 above, I can not see notability here. --Bduke (talk) 00:32, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete: This fellow doesn't shave. As per above, price is not a factor of notability, it is reliable, secondary sources. Some of those references (Arabian Business) require registration. Not enough references about the fellow. As per nom and John B123. --Whiteguru (talk) 06:42, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment: Under WP:BEFORE it is stated:
 * C. Consider whether the article could be improved rather than deleted
 * 2. If the article was recently created, please consider allowing the contributors more time to develop the article.
 * The article was created on 2 August 2021‎ and proposed for deletion on the same day, so I do not believe this procedure was followed. Adding would have been more appropriate at this stage. Thus, I think the correct WP:AFD procedure under WP:BEFORE should be followed before a deletion process is considered again. Assuming the checking editor agrees, I think Keep with a  notice would be more appropriate for the moment as the article develops. —Jonathan Bowen (talk) 14:03, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * It's pointless giving an article time to develop if it doesn't have a chance of meeting the notability guidelines no matter how the article is developed. To tag now and let the creator or other editors spend time developing the article and then it gets deleted at a later date seems a cruel waste of time. --John B123 (talk) 14:27, 5 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep. The article has been improved with a couple of additional sources added since the three deletion votes above. Agreed with Jonathan above that this article ought to be given more time to develop. NemesisAT (talk) 14:22, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I am trying to source several archived articles (wayback) kindly request time to locate them. O66 (talk) 18:01, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete: Delete per nom nearlyevil  665  17:48, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. More references have been added, Article has improved. Agree with NemesisAT and Jpbowen that this article needs additional time to develop. Dmnclefebvre (talk) 12:28, 6 August 2021 (UTC) — Dmnclefebvre (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * CU-confirmed sock of, both part of a substantial UPE farm, see Sockpuppet investigations/Orlaw66. --Blablubbs (talk) 18:29, 6 August 2021 (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.