Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gabriel Williams


 * 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. The consensus is that the subject does not meet the notability guidelines for inclusion. WP:BLP1E and WP:NOT are also cited. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 11:33, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Gabriel Williams

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This article seems to fail the notability requirements. Notability (people) suggests that "A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject" but this doesn't seem to be the case here. The single article in the New York Post does not satisfy this requirement. Notability (criminal acts) suggests that "A criminal act is notable if it receives significant coverage in sources with national or global scope" but again this doesn't seem to be the case here. I'd therefore propose that it is deleted because it doesn't satisfy the notability criteria. I note that there is only one incoming link from another article but even that doesn't seem particular relevant and so that is probably another indication of the lack of notability of this particular individual. There might be justification to mention this individual in other Scientology related articles but a separate article is not merited. Adambro (talk) 10:24, 24 April 2009 (UTC) 
 * Delete, fails WP:NOTE, after some searching I was unable to find significant coverage in other sources. Cirt (talk) 11:20, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.  —Cirt (talk) 11:28, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions.  —Cirt (talk) 11:28, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  —Cirt (talk) 11:28, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:02, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:05, 1 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete fails WP:NOTE. Renaissancee (talk) 01:27, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails notability, WP:BLP1E, WP:NOT.  Dawn Bard (talk) 03:51, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as noted above, this was a one-time notoriety. A mention in another article may be appropriate. Drawn Some (talk)
 * Strong Delete. Seriously fails WP:N, WP:BLP1E and WP:NOT. Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 17:02, 1 May 2009 (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.