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. RL0919 (talk) 06:33, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Raul Calvoz

[edit]

[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)

I was brought to this page by an RfC questioning the subject's notability. I've since gone through the page and removed the promotional and unsourced content. Subject lacks notability and significant coverage in reliable sources thus not meeting general notability requirements. Meatsgains^(talk) 03:01, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails GNG and WP:NLAWYER. Hrodvarsson (talk) 03:34, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:47, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:47, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Seems like a garden variety lawyer whose publications do not stand out enough to support notability. Willy No1lakersfan (Talk - Edits) 10:20, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:GNG and WP:NLAWYER. Best, GPL93 (talk) 15:27, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Agree with above. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NLAWYER Taewangkorea (talk) 03:00, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, Per nom. Subject does not meet WP:GNG. Nikoo.Amini (talk) 17:26, 3 August 2019 (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.