Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tomas Karpavičius


 * 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. JohnCD (talk) 22:28, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Tomas Karpavičius

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Contested speedy deletion. Article on a civil servant, which does not qualify for inherent notability and must pass WP:GNG. Unfortunately, that does not seem to be the case here. Just a good, solid civil servant, who was selected as a "civil servant of the year" in Lithuania in 2015 and received some coverage for it(1 and 2). Unfortunately, that coverage is either very shallow (source 2) or not independent (source 1 lists his employer as an author, so it's effectively a PR piece). Finally, the article reads like a CV, the sources in the article are not independent and the article seems to be edited entirely by a COI editor (the username of the contributor and the username of the uploader of the photo suggest they are related to the Ministry of Communications, the subject's employer). No longer a penguin (talk) 10:51, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 11:38, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 11:38, 23 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete - agree with nom. COI author, reads as CV, nothing special to stand out among 1000s of other civil servants. Renata (talk) 18:44, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lithuania-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 06:20, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Needs more input. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:27, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:27, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:PROMO; a weakly sourced vanity page. No indications of notability or significance. Wikipedia is not LinkedIn. K.e.coffman (talk) 09:06, 2 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.