Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Enrique Dans (2nd nomination)


 * 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. ✗ plicit  00:26, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Enrique Dans
AfDs for this article:


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

Would have prodded, but already been deleted once through AfD. Not enough in-depth coverage to meet WP:GNG, and does not meet WP:NSCHOLAR.  Onel 5969  TT me 01:12, 3 January 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  04:16, 10 January 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Curbon7 (talk) 04:23, 17 January 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – AssumeGoodWraith  (talk | contribs) 04:16, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 02:22, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 02:22, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 02:22, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. The citation record looks far short of WP:NPROF in what I believe to be a higher citation field; no sign of other notability.  Comment that IE Business School, where the subject works, also shows sign of WP:PROMO editing. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 22:11, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete None of the criteria of WP:NPROF appear to apply. The closest is the claim that this person's blog has won awards but on closer inspection, one was a nomination and the other was a newspaper's "Best of" list. The sources necessary to comply with any other SNG or the GNG also appear to be lacking based on the article sources and searches. Eggishorn  (talk) (contrib) 17:03, 24 January 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.