Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sanjay Shah (businessman) (2nd nomination)


 * 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 keep. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 22:11, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Sanjay Shah (businessman)
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The article is made up of non-notable accomplishments and an unproven fraud accusation that never went to trial. Jppcap (talk) previously nominated it for AfD based on WP:NOTNEWS, WP:BLP1E, WP:BLPCRIME, concluding in no consensus. SwisterTwister suggested we relist this, and I agree. The article's content simply does not meet WP:GNG. RenaultMurnles (talk) 13:09, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:48, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Denmark-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:48, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions.  Jupitus Smart  13:48, 15 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep - Being a fugitive from the law and escaping to a country without an extradition treaty may perhaps postpone criminal trial in some jurisdictions - but this if at all increased the notability of the person. BLPCRIME really doesn't address fugitives. He is receiving on-going coverage in 2017 - . We are talking about a case exceeding a billion dollars - and a suspect who had some notability also beforehand, and in which very large (hundreds of millions) forfeiture has already been made.Icewhiz (talk) 14:05, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Arab Emirates-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:52, 15 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep - per good sources, and ongoing coverage.BabbaQ (talk) 15:53, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep in-depth coverage of fraud case in major media not only in Denmark, but in London and New York carry him easily past WP:GNG.E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:42, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep: Sources are sufficient to establish notability. --Guy Macon (talk) 04:21, 17 May 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.