[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
Not notable - a WP:BEFORE search shows that this person is a prolific self-promoter making all kinds of self-aggrandising claims, but there is nothing beyond minor local coverage and puffery. Also likely WP:COI concerns given the editing pattern here, as well as elsewhere. Melcous (talk) 16:00, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
DO NOT DELETE-This article is credible and should not be deleted. References are verified. Person is notable. Additional references were added after comments were made requesting additional references. Not self-promotion. Facts with references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sbhpost (talk • contribs) 02:32, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Why is this article being targeted for deletion when the statements made are true, verified references for statements are provided, and the accomplishments are notable? Please do not censor this speech. Not self-promotion, not politics.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Sbhpost (talk • contribs) DO NOT DELETE: Oaktree b, the article was at least a paragraph previously, with verifiable references. However, someone edited the article repeatedly to what is displayed currently. I do not know what ref padding is. Melcous, I do not know you. Why do you seem to have a personal vendetta against me, and be leading the crusade of page deletion? If additions are made to the article, you erroneously refer to it as puffery or similar. If additions are not made, you erroneously allege lack of notability. The person and accomplishments are notable. If you see an actual error, perhaps you should reach out and try to assist one with potential corrections, rather than launching an unwarranted deletion crusade. Oaktree, Nothing in this article indicates or illudes to the political status of the subject or any of said subject's real or perceived connections. Please explicate where you find any political reference. Otherwise, please do not allow your inaccurate personal opinion to interfere with freedom of speech for a notable subject. Thank you. Alanscottwalker, What self-promo? There is none. The statements concerning the individual are notable facts with verified references. To all who post in reference to this matter, please refrain from false accusations, and/or negatively skewed personal opinions, as such has no place here. If you have constructive corrective suggestions, please relay such respectfully, rather than aligning with a speech censorship campaign on a notable subject. If something necessary is missing, why not communicate that and assist, rather than maliciously considering a deletion? Perhaps there are things needed of which I was/am not aware. If you really have honorable intentions, assist, DO NOT DELETE. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sbhpost (talk • contribs) 12:40, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Paul H., Your statements are false. Coverage and references provided. What is SIGCOV? Inform me of how to check this. I do not understand why you all seem joyful about censoring speech for a notable individual with verifiable references. Why the personal attack? Why not assist with corrections (if needed)? DO NOT DELETE. Are you all being paid to continue this personal censorship attack on me and the subject?
N, How do I sign my comments? I am sticking to the topic. The issue is you all are attacking, rather than trying to assist. There is no reason for anyone to have placed this article for deletion consideration, unless they had/have malicious intent.