Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phil Nickinson


 * 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.  Sandstein  11:04, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Phil Nickinson

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Insignificant, non-notable. Wikipedia will become a Biography Hub for such people. Light2021 (talk) 14:20, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep per the sources in the article. Passes WP:GNG. KGirlTrucker81huh? what I'm been doing 23:29, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete: Subject references are only "mere mentions" needs independent reliable source.--Historical Ben (talk) 22:05, 16 October 2016 (UTC) WP:SOCK vote struck ~Hydronium~Hydroxide~(Talk)~ 09:50, 23 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete -- not independently notable in re Android Central. Strictly a vanity page at this point. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:06, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:06, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:07, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:07, 17 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete Notability not achieved. This vapidly written BLP gets its sources only from Churnalism. Xxanthippe (talk) 01:16, 17 October 2016 (UTC).
 * Delete no evidence of notability - David Gerard (talk) 13:17, 17 October 2016 (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.