Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steven Toma

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 - consensus notes a lack of reliable sources, and possibly a failure of WP:BIO (though, of course, how can we know without reliable sources?) WilyD 20:51, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Steven Toma

Steven Toma (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Non notable retired stockbroker. No evidence of notability aside from unsuccessful political campaign. Sorted as part of WP:WPNN Daniel J. Leivick 01:18, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete per lack of "significant coverage from independent sources" (none listed and I couldnt find any through google) Corpx 02:40, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
  • KEEP. Article text has some notable items, especially dealing with Arizona politics. There are some links on google, although you have to look hard to find them. The article has been tagged as a stub and in need of references. Let's keep it for now and wait for improvements. If the article isn't improved, I'm sure other Wikipedians will tag it for deletion later with better arguments than we have now. Truthanado 02:49, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. There's no assertion of precisely what Mr. Toma did in Arizona politics - just that he was somehow involved. Truthanado, if you would be so kind as to locate and drop in those links that demonstrate notability? If you can do that, and they jive against WP:N, I'll change my mind. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 02:59, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per a complete lack of verification of notability in reliable sources, plus even if the facts in the article were verified, he'd still fail WP:BIO. VanTucky (talk) 03:33, 18 July 2007 (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.