Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eminoior


 * 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. Courcelles 00:33, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Eminoior

 * – ( View AfD View log )

The article fails to meet WP:GNG, as there is a lack of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".


 * Footnote 1 is Iordache's personal site, which doesn't count as independent coverage.
 * Footnote 2 merely tells us that he appeared as one of dozens and dozens of individuals featured in a dictionary of writers from one Romanian county. This may seem promising, but keep in mind that this is a work of local interest (he does not appear in the General Dictionary of Romanian Literature, which would indeed have implied notability). Plus, we have no means of consulting the source to see what it says.
 * Footnote 3 mentions him once as part of a group of people&mdash;in a forum post, again not a reliable source.
 * Footnote 4 reprints a poem of his, which does not count as independent coverage.
 * Footnote 5 indicates he heads an NGO for children, but says absolutely nothing else about him: not "significant" coverage.
 * Same with footnote 6, which is, in any case, a press release.
 * Footnote 7 mentions him once as the NGO's president, but fails to add anything except that he promotes using a toll-free number to report child abuse: again, not significant coverage.
 * Footnote 8 mentions him once as NGO president, and nothing else, and in any case is a press release.
 * Footnote 9 is one of Iordache's private Google Docs and not accessible by us.
 * Footnote 10 makes no mention of Iordache.
 * Footnote 11 is a review of Iordache's debut volume. If he were better covered in other sources, this would be citable; on the other hand, OC does review numerous works every month and not every one is by a notable author; note in particular that this 2002 mention is the only one they've made of him.
 * Footnote 12 is the website of a publisher and has nothing directly to do with Iordache.
 * Footnote 13 is a long, long list of works appearing during 2009. Yes, one of them is by Iordache, but having one's name on such a list is hardly substantive evidence of notability.
 * Footnote 14 indicates he won a prize as a high school student, but merely as part of a table of other winners, without giving any coverage to him in particular.
 * The external links are mostly the same as the footnotes, except for this (his book at his publisher's site: not independent) and this (his name as part of a long list: not significant)

The case for notability is weak, and the bulk of the above does little to advance it. Even if his appearance in a dictionary of local literary figures indicates small-scale repute, WP:BURDEN requires actual citations from there to demonstrate notability; otherwise, we really don't know what is said there and have no idea of the depth of coverage. Same with the book review: could be interesting as part of a pattern, but in isolation, it means little. Biruitorul Talk 16:47, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Romania-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:45, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:45, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:45, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete No claim of notability, unless you count helping to develop "a manual of best practices for teenage leaving national social protection system." EEng (talk) 21:53, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per the 15+ reasons provided by nom. Qworty (talk) 19:42, 29 December 2010 (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.