Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andris Wasono

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:02, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Andris Wasono

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Generally lack of notability and fails criteria set on WP:BASIC. Also, the article created by sock known for making non-notable BPL. Proposed for PROD earlier but blocked by IP editor (possibly sock) Ckfasdf (talk) 06:07, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Indonesia-related deletion discussions. Owen× ☎ 07:36, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:24, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Enough sources exist to establish notability in my opinion (a web search produces more sources than are cited in the article). Redtree21 (talk) 08:19, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Most of sources found on web search primarily originate from the bengkalis.go.id domain, where he holds an official position, suggesting they shouldn't be considered for notability since those sources can be considered self-published. And, as per WP:NPOL, local official/political figures could be regarded as notable if they receive significant press coverage. I assume that "significant" press coverage implies coverage on at least a national level, whereas he only garners attention from local media. Ckfasdf (talk) 08:57, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy ping @Redtree21:. Ckfasdf (talk) 06:20, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. If you want a Keep vote to be taken seriously, bring the reliable sources you found into this discussion so they can be evaluated, don't just do a web search.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:17, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I haven't really been able to find anything to establish notability either. Allan Nonymous (talk) 01:13, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist, I don't see any consensus here for any particular outcome.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:59, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Nothing applied or found demonstrates WP:Reliable sources independent of the subject. Doesn't meet GNG or ANYBIO. I'm not seeing any assertion this subject is more than an ordinary civil servant. BusterD (talk) 13:02, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:GNG - Robertjamal12 ~🔔 14:29, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.