Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Dmello (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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Liz Read! Talk! 12:09, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

John Dmello
AfDs for this article:


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

The sources cited in the article for establishing notability (also listed on the talk page) are WP:SPONSORED and WP:NEWSORGINDIA. The list includes articles from India Today, Outlook India, and ANI. Additionally, sources like The New Indian Express and Financial Express are suspected to be sponsored due to lack of authorship. This article was previously soft-deleted via AfD. Grabup (talk) 10:08, 23 April 2024 (UTC) Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  12:34, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and India. Grabup (talk) 10:08, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Goa-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  10:53, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: Being an organic farmer in the 21st Century doesn't get you notability. The sourcing reads as PR for the company, which isn't useful here. I don't see any sources we can use, nor do I find any that aren't PR'ish. Oaktree b (talk) 15:28, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Comment @ removed the Sponsored citations, which I also wanted to remove but I did’t as I want to show others. Grabup (talk) 13:45, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete. I was a weak delete originally, but after reading WP:NEWSORGINDIA and how both the Financial Express and The New Indian Express do not engage in any sort of analysis and read as PR-pieces (the Financial Express is particularly weak, it's mostly a WP:INTERVIEW which is not really independent on its own), I am happy seeing this article go unless significantly better sourcing (independence-wise and sigcov-wise) is found. Pilaz (talk) 09:20, 6 May 2024 (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.