Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Tellinger


 * 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. Redirect is at editorial discretion.  Sandstein  16:27, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Michael Tellinger

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Entirely based on two primary sources. MrBill3 (talk) 15:16, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep - a basic search finds lots of sources. The article has been extensively edited by the subject and is in a terrible state, but that's no reason to delete it. Greenman (talk) 17:43, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I have reverted to an earlier version to undo the author's promotional additions, and added various sources. Greenman (talk) 18:05, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of South Africa-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:17, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:17, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:18, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:18, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:28, 28 October 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Aunva6talk - contribs 14:36, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Strong delete Extreme claims require good citations. What we have here is one or two overly fast to believe journalists, and a clear case of a conspiracy theory pusher. Fringe ideas require good coverage to show that the subject has generated coverage outside of conspiracy theory frienges. Nothing of the kind is provided here.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:39, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Extreme claims require good citations. - there is a difference between what the subject is claiming and what the article states, so your point is not applicable. Did you follow the sources? The Mail and Guardian articles hardly seem fast to believe, they are quite mocking in tone. The subject, as leader of a political party with fringe claims, has been written in mainstream media, and is widely recognised, so meets notability criteria. Greenman (talk) 07:12, 5 November 2017 (UTC)


 * The revert to a better version is definitely an improvement. I am not seeing much sourcing to establish notability. He wrote some books, founded a fringe political party and ran unsuccessfully for office, what reliable sources have found him notable enough to cover substantially? MrBill3 (talk) 13:38, 5 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete founding the Ubuntu Party isn't a sufficient claim of notability on its own. Everything else is WP:BLPFRINGE and doesn't have enough coverage/importance to meet those guidelines. power~enwiki ( π,  ν ) 21:19, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Ubuntu Party as his most (if weakly) notable achievement. - The Bushranger One ping only 03:49, 10 November 2017 (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.