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 incubate to Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Daniel Minoli. There's a weak consensus to keep this article but it's a large BLP with only one source. Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:46, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Minoli[edit]

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

Completing nomination for User:188.115.8.121. On the merits, I have no opinion - though I note that, at the time of this writing, the article has only one source. Make of that what you will. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 17:56, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The original nomination reads thus: "For deletion, complete article is coming from the Author himself. Check IP (Capital One Financial ) from the initial edit." UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 17:56, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:57, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:57, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete - Seems wholly lacking in decent sources and, as a BLP, that isn't good. Considering the subject is an author of IT books, you'd think there would be plenty written about him, but I can't find anything online apart from this review of one of his books (which may indicate there are some earlier offline sources somewhere). But being mostly unsourced at the moment, I think the article should go! Sionk (talk) 01:32, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 12:38, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep but possibly userfy - based on the verifiable claim as a co-discoverer of Hyperperfect numbers, he's surely notable. A few simple online searches show lots of possible sources. Bearian (talk) 17:09, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep appears to meet WP:AUTHOR. --Kvng (talk) 03:00, 22 May 2012 (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.