Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eusebiu Blindu


 * 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. MastCell Talk 18:07, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Eusebiu Blindu

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Repeatedly "A7'd" article now has an assertion of notability via external refs, but still would appear to fail WP:ANYBIO and any other relevant policies. As always, more than than happy to be proven wrong. Shirt58 (talk) 13:27, 15 May 2012 (UTC)



he is a very known software test blogger actually. Probably one of the top 100 testers in the world. He has a recognition from his peers. Not sure what personal official awards he has. He is known as a "puzzle guy" in his field. Michecksz (talk) 13:46, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 14:09, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 14:09, 15 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete It appears to fail GNG in English sources. Sorry! Sarah (talk) 17:07, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep the GNG are satisfying enough. Please state the exact GNG rule that is failing — Preceding unsigned comment added by Testingfan (talk • contribs) 17:36, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Weak keep, but note that the subject might be involved in the article, given this Yahoo! Answers question by a "Eusebiu". Some scrutiny is in order even if the article is kept. {&#123; Nihiltres &#124;talk&#124;edits&#124;⚡}&#125; 19:11, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete having reviewed the (lacking) sources and given the AFD vandalism and deletion of the YA question—the latter two seem to indicate bad faith. {&#123; Nihiltres &#124;talk&#124;edits&#124;⚡}&#125; 18:22, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AtAxe5qeHZYL27X.urbFkbdy.Bd.;_ylv=3?qid=20120515054512AAKiJhn like all notable people do! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.4.109.214 (talk) 19:20, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete So a bunch of guys linking to each others blogs is what counts as reliably sourced notability these days? Why is this even being discussed?  He is asking for help on Yahoo! Answers..


 *  Weak Strong delete Several of the sources are self-published or utterly trivial, and none of them seems to meet the definition of significant coverage. --bonadea contributions talk 20:22, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * The various SPAs trying to sabotage the AfD process, creating content forks and in general being concerned only with promoting this person in various WP articles are not exactly reassuring. --bonadea contributions talk 20:25, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Eusebiu_Blindu&diff=prev&oldid=492748204 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.4.109.214 (talk) 20:32, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note Repeated vandalism of this process removing Delete comments and rewriting contributions...


 * I only just noticed and have changed by !vote from weak delete (based on reputable editors apparently !voting keep, so maybe they knew something I didn't) to strong delete (based on the fact that they actually !voted delete...) --bonadea contributions talk 20:38, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * This and this is the full extent of the AfD vandalism. --bonadea contributions talk 20:41, 15 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete per the IP. Most of the sources seem to be personal blogs or unreliable. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 20:34, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete As per previous comment by Bonadea, several of the sources are self-published, the remainder are blogs, user submitted content or websites that do not fit the description of 'reliable, independent' news sources. Granted the guy is doing his job well, but he hasn't been widely noticed and talked about. I can't see any way this subject meets WP:GNG. Sionk (talk) 20:36, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and above. No credible sources supporting notability or significance. Campaign to sabotage AFD page is a dead giveaway..... 71.241.200.94 (talk) 21:19, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete; appears to fail the GNG. bobrayner (talk) 15:14, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note to closing admin: currently redirects to this article. If the outcome of this discussion is delete, the redirect should be deleted (per WP:CSD). Thryduulf (talk) 19:14, 17 May 2012 (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.