Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Nemelka


 * 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. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 07:12, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Michael Nemelka

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Subject does not pass WP:NBIO- notability is not inherited from currently being one of the Deputy trade representatives. 1292simon (talk) 11:45, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  20:23, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  20:23, 19 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Did you check Office of the United States Trade Representative? If you look at the infobox, you'll see that all of the agency executives, including deputies, have their own articles. Would you make the same argument for the other executives, or is there something unique about this article that supports deletion? Edge3 (talk) 05:38, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm neutral on this one. Please note that I didn't start this AfD. Spiderone  10:08, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh my gosh! So sorry... I was really tired last night and meant to ping the nominator. Same question applies to you! Thanks, Edge3 (talk) 16:21, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi Edge3. I haven't looked at the articles, but since ambassadors are not considered inherently notable, then I believe a deputy trade rep would also need other significant events to pass WP:NBIO. Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 04:02, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok, I'm going to take a look at the other ones to see if they warrant deletion. For this article, I agree that we should delete. Edge3 (talk) 05:11, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete This is not a high enough level appointment to lead to default notability and the sourcing does not show notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:42, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep While this article seems a little thinner than a couple of the others on Deputy US Trade Representatives, I would like to keep this piece, since we have a set of articles on these Deputy US Trade Representatives. There are only 3 deputies under Robert Lighthizer, unlike Assistant Trade Representatives, which number around 20.--Concertmusic (talk) 18:08, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete The only secondary source in the article is about the confirmation to the position of a deputy trade representative for the USA. Merely holding that position does not automatically make him notable. Conclusion: not notable.  PJvanMill ) talk ( 13:50, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:46, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete - simply doesn't pass WP:GNG.  Onel 5969  TT me 23:50, 10 December 2020 (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.