Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tamás Boros


 * 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 Patar knight - chat/contributions 01:00, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Tamás Boros

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Subject of the article fails WP:GNG. No evidence of notability. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 13:44, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Keep The article should not be deleted. It contains many references to his international publications, his media appearances in BBC, Financial Times etc. He is the board member of some well-known institutions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.129.201.204 (talk) 13:29, 3 November 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kharkiv07  ( T ) 14:23, 4 November 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 13:03, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 22:22, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 22:22, 15 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete as searches only found a few links through News and two web searches, nothing better. BTW There's no place as Hungaria and the deletion sort is actually Hungary (WikiProject Deletion sorting/Hungary).  SwisterTwister   talk  05:16, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
 * many thanks. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 05:40, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hungary-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  05:16, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  05:17, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  05:17, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 22:27, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep If you google search him, you'll get more than 25,000 hits. Most of the hits are interviews, publications, lectures in conferences. References/media appearances can be found in 10-15 different languages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:AB88:1080:C880:458C:A005:4527:3477 (talk) 22:18, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment - Considering this is getting to a third relist and I'm not sure if anyone else is going to comment soon, I'll notify who I know lists to be notified of these subject AfDs anyway.  SwisterTwister   talk  23:26, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Classic attempt to inflate the importance of a minor figure. Not an academic -- no academic position. Only 2 publications in Worldcat, neither with more than 1 holding . The ones mentioned here are apparently articles, not books, so he does not meet WP:AUTHOR. You will indeed find links to his columns and his articles and to places like the references in this article where is is one of a number of people mentioned .Not a single third party references seems to say anything significant about him or his ideas. So he does not even meet the GNG. Based on the Google translation, the Hungarian article adds nothing further. Young European of the Year is a junior award, and none of the other people listed have articles in the enWP--or in their home encycopedia. He may become notable some day and then there can be an article.  I note the two ip eds have made no other contribution to WP than in this discussionand their comments should therefore be disregarded.    DGG ( talk ) 00:49, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete: Clear vanity page. Only people interested in creating the article and supporting its existence are unregistered and/or SPA editors. Not notable. No reason to keep. Rayman60 (talk) 20:14, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - searches did not turn up enough in-depth coverage from reliable sources to show they pass WP:GNG, and per 's excellent analysis, clearly doesn't meet WP:AUTHOR.  Onel 5969  TT me 15:52, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
 * The above deletion debate is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.