Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dan Dănilă

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. KTC (talk) 13:24, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dan Dănilă

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

Previously deleted via WP:PROD. I have restored it per a request posted at WP:REFUND but feel that it should be nominated for AFD here. The name is common enough to generate several search hits in non-English languages, but I cannot tell if any of them constitute actual significant coverage of this particular person by independent reliable sources. Happy to withdraw nomination if anyone can verify notability. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:25, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment the same article exists on five other language Wikis, however they are all entirely unsourced as well (and this just looks like a translation of one of those page). --kelapstick^(bainuu) 22:14, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. - McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 00:06, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. - McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 00:06, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Romania-related deletion discussions. - McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 00:07, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. - McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 00:08, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I was the prodder, and I continue supporting deletion. Although the man clearly exists and clearly writes poetry, everything I could find about him in some way falls short: bare poems, passing mentions, book launch announcements in terribly obscure newspapers, likely self-submitted blurbs on the sites of organizations with fairly open enrollment, blurbs written by editors who've published him.
In other words, there is, as far as I can tell, nothing that is unambiguously a) independent b) in-depth and c) quotable. And because of that, we shouldn't be hosting his biography, no matter how respectable his career has been. - Biruitorul ^Talk 15:07, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:49, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above. Other than his odd nationality, he seems to be a run of the mill poet. Editors above have pointed out that he fails WP:42. Bearian (talk) 01:29, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per Biruitorul. 03:22, 19 January 2015 (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.