Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leonard Zhakata


 * 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   speedy keep. nominator withdrawn Magioladitis (talk) 07:49, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Leonard Zhakata

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

Unreferenced biography. Please delete. Alio The Fool 22:33, 3 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Article is apparently in the middle of an overhaul, and there's been tons of references added. Looks OK to me on a quick glance. fuzzy510 (talk) 23:20, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Referenced biography. Please keep. For the longer version: Notability has been established through significant coverage in multiple reliable sources as added to the article. Note to nominator: Please read WP:BEFORE. :) — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  23:31, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Fine if you want to fix it. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Leonard_Zhakata&oldid=276880483 is what it looked like. If no one is giving references I am going to AFD. If you want to source it fine go ahead and we'll keep it. In its state it deserved to be deleted and I'm not going to fix unrefed biographies if people won't fix them. This article has been like this for years I think. But if you want to withdraw fine, b/c it won't be delted now. Alio The Fool 00:30, 5 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:00, 4 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep my impression of the google hits is that this person is notable, however, I have no idea about Zimbabwe books and web content, and I would not be at all surprised in ability to verify much of it is not available online. This is exactly the sort of material which needs offline sourcing to help rectify systemic bias and make the internet a better place by having material not currently available online. Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:01, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep It's a workable article — Ched :  Yes?   ©  14:17, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep and withdraw - Now has references so its ok. Alio The Fool 00:31, 5 April 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.