| Revision as of 17:30, 29 December 2024 editRobert McClenon (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers197,256 edits →Greg Flynn (businessman): endorse← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:12, 29 December 2024 edit undoCryptic (talk | contribs)Administrators41,692 editsm →Greg Flynn (businessman): not a fileNext edit → | ||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
| Add a new entry BELOW THIS LINE copying the format: {{subst:drv2|page=<PAGE NAME>|xfd_page=<XFD PAGE NAME>|reason=<REASON>}} ~~~~ --> | Add a new entry BELOW THIS LINE copying the format: {{subst:drv2|page=<PAGE NAME>|xfd_page=<XFD PAGE NAME>|reason=<REASON>}} ~~~~ --> | ||
| ====]==== | ====]==== | ||
| :{{DRV links|Greg Flynn (businessman)|xfd_page=Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/ |
:{{DRV links|Greg Flynn (businessman)|xfd_page=Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Greg Flynn (businessman)}} | ||
| It is clear to me that the subject meets notability guidelines. Several solid sources were found late in the deletion discussion. I think if more editors were involved who examined those sources, the article would have been kept. ] (]) 03:26, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | It is clear to me that the subject meets notability guidelines. Several solid sources were found late in the deletion discussion. I think if more editors were involved who examined those sources, the article would have been kept. ] (]) 03:26, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | ||
| * '''Endorse''' The discussion clearly shows that you and others made their cases there but failed to convince the other participants. DRV is not for taking a second bite at the apple. ] ] 06:50, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | * '''Endorse''' The discussion clearly shows that you and others made their cases there but failed to convince the other participants. DRV is not for taking a second bite at the apple. ] ] 06:50, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 18:12, 29 December 2024
< 2024 December 28 Deletion review archives: 2024 December 2024 December 30 >29 December 2024
Greg Flynn (businessman)
It is clear to me that the subject meets notability guidelines. Several solid sources were found late in the deletion discussion. I think if more editors were involved who examined those sources, the article would have been kept. Thriley (talk) 03:26, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- Endorse The discussion clearly shows that you and others made their cases there but failed to convince the other participants. DRV is not for taking a second bite at the apple. * Pppery * it has begun... 06:50, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- Endorse That was closed correctly. There was a clear consensus the available sources were not good enough for an article, and in reviewing those sources I don't see clear error. SportingFlyer T·C 14:47, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- Endorse - The close correctly reflected consensus. It isn't the function of DRV to re-review the sources. The title has not been salted. The appellant may create a draft with the additional sources and submit the draft for review. The AFC reviewer is likely to request that a copy of the deleted article be emailed or userfied to them so that they can compare the draft and the deleted article. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:29, 29 December 2024 (UTC)