Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David M. Traversi


 * 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. Secret account 01:58, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

David M. Traversi

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Current article does not have any acceptable references. It is either a verification issue if sources exist, or a notability problem if they do not, but either way it is not fit for inclusion. CorporateM (Talk) 03:46, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:51, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:51, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:51, 19 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Theopolisme ( talk )  04:58, 25 July 2013 (UTC)




 * Delete - my God, what horrific puffery. The quote in the lede seemed like a strange way to describe a book by a relative unknown with only one book... so I went looking. The quote is from a business person and the only place I could find it is on the subject's publisher's website, so we can't use it anyway. Nonetheless, the quote is actually, "articulated a new paradigm of the leadership model". Our article suggests he was "hailed as defining the 'new leadership paradigm'." (My underline). Total misrepresentation. Given the quality of the "sources" provided, the article is actually, basically un-sourced. I'm going to go through and remove the self-published and unsourced stuff, after which I suspect it might almost qualify for speedy deletion. Stalwart 111  06:34, 25 July 2013 (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.