Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edward Mickolus


 * 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 keep. albeit weakly. There is no consensus to delete this. Star  Mississippi  01:16, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Edward Mickolus

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

No indication in the article or in searches that this article passes WP:ANYBIO or WP:GNG. All references are lacking in either significance, independence, or reliability. Also violates WP:NOTRESUME. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 21:30, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  Eggishorn  (talk) (contrib) 21:30, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions.  Eggishorn  (talk) (contrib) 21:30, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lithuania-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:45, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:45, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:46, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:46, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:47, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment: This looks like a good faith 2011 contribution by now blocked User:Geo Swan. This diff shows the insertion of all the resume info in 2018 by the subject themself. No opinion about the outcome here. BusterD (talk) 21:47, 1 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Weak keep So I came across this article in the references section of Hassan Al-Turabi's article. I think it helps show that it's a good source for the article, but other than that, I can't think of any other reason why he'd count as notable. However, I posted on the talk page and noticeboard specifically without mentioning article deletion since I disagree with Wikipedia's notability guidelines in general, but if it violates them, then there's not much else to do other than removal. Seabass715 (talk) 23:02, 1 February 2022 (UTC)Seabass715.
 * Weak keep? There may be a weak pass of WP:AUTHOR, but the BLP contains a vast amount of dross that should be deleted. Xxanthippe (talk) 01:39, 2 February 2022 (UTC).
 * Keep Marquis Who's Who doesn't count though and other sources briefly discuss him. But I found some book reviews so inclined towards keep. Coverage:, , . 67.168.136.107 (talk) 22:00, 6 February 2022 (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.