Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glenford Eckleton Mitchell


 * 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. Mz7 (talk) 04:50, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Glenford Eckleton Mitchell

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Other than a couple of trivial mentions there is absolutely nothing out there regarding this individual. Fails WP:GNG.  Onel 5969  TT me 20:53, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - Doesn't have the "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" that is required for notability. The two sources in the article are repeating the same one-paragraph bio word-for-word, so there is only one source. The source is also from the Baha'i World News Service, which works for the Universal House of Justice. And regarding WP:CLERGY, the members of the Universal House of Justice do not have any individual notoriety or authority outside of the council, and most Baha'is would not recognize the name or face. Cuñado  ☼ -  Talk  00:09, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete/redirect to Universal House of Justice - Reliance on primary sources that cannot be used to establish notability. There's really not much else out there about the subject, as Onel5969 noted; making a stand-alone article about this would be very difficult. dragfyre_ ʞןɐʇ c 13:41, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - Significant third party sources do not exist to define notability. -- Jeff3000 (talk) 15:55, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:22, 28 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete: fails WP:ANYBIO.   Dr Strauss   talk   please use when replying 11:59, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete No significant coverage found in reliable sources. Fails WP:GNG. Antonioatrylia (talk) 20:20, 3 August 2017 (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.