Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mahmut L. Ünlü


 * 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. User:Stalwart111 makes a compelling case here. Lankiveil (speak to me) 12:42, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Mahmut L. Ünlü

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Was BLP PRODed some time back, one link is repeated, the other is broken and at the end of the day, I don't see notability that passes WP:GNG and a lot of unsourced BLP info. Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124; WER  14:55, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:52, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:52, 24 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep, I just added a NY Times source which calls him notable Wikiguys12 (talk) 23:23, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mz7 (talk) 18:17, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar ♔   00:22, 9 July 2014 (UTC)




 * Delete - the NYTimes article is the only coverage I could find of the subject and all it does is confirm he runs the company and is happy about the success of Turkey's currency. It's hardly significant coverage and it certainly doesn't "call him notable". It's actually coverage of Turkey's currency with commentary from him (about his own business). The other sources come from his company and don't constitute coverage in independent reliable sources. Thus, in my view, he doesn't meet WP:GNG. Even if we accepted the NYTimes article as being significant coverage in a reliable source (which I don't think it is), it's still only one source and we need coverage in multiple sources.  St ★ lwart 1 1 1 07:44, 9 July 2014 (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.