Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Banjavich


 * 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   no consensus. With no prejudice towards an early re-nomination in case sufficient reliable sources aren't added in the coming future  Wifione  Message 13:40, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Mark Banjavich

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I couldn't establish that he has significant enough coverage to meet WP:GNG or WP:BIO Boleyn (talk) 11:23, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  Everymorning   talk to me  13:16, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.  Everymorning   talk to me  13:16, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * Delete not notable due to no significant coverage. Patents and book mentioned are evidence of notability to other people not MB. Just reads like anyone's LinkedIn profile--Mevagiss (talk) 13:33, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep: There is this which has significant coverage of the subject.  There are other mentions of him in Google Books.  Granted the article is in a sad state, but for his era the coverage is significant. Vrac (talk) 15:17, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep: The amount of independent coverage is minimal, although it does certainly exist. The article would have to be most likely rewritten if kept.  CarnivorousBunny talk • contribs  23:29, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 08:43, 15 December 2014 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Rcsprinter123    (natter)  @ 21:44, 22 December 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.