Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lawrence Brahm
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
You have new messages (last change).
- 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 of the debate was keep -- Samir धर्म 06:07, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Lawrence Brahm
Seems not to meet notability standards. Nertz 05:29, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
- Keep; do you have an informed suspicion that he doesn't, or are you just assuming he doesn't? The lead Google hit is a Time article on him [1], the second is a search listing on Amazon UK of the three China-related books he's authored. Among other hits are citations from MSNBC, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation and BusinessWeek. RGTraynor 07:57, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
- Keep - three books in amazon ( 2 apparently in stock ), and a fair few newspaper hits not related to advertising. Seems a notable enough person by WP:BIO standards - Peripitus 09:24, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
- Keep assuming that this Laurence Brahm is the author and business leader mentioned in RGTraynor's links, he meets WP:BIO. I've contacted the original author to request that sources and citations be added to this article to establish that it meets WP:BIO criteria. I'd do it myself if I had any knowledge of the subject (international business is so drearily boring...)--Isotope23 17:05, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- Comment - He is; I went through several of the major links. RGTraynor 19:20, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
- Keep as above. Xyrael T 19:41, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
- Keep - I created the article, and he certainly is known for more than just one sentence worth of stuff - he is indeed the same person with the books above, he has a regular columnn in the largest English language newspaper of this region, and runs a famous restaurant/club in Beijing, China. Will add some of these things to the article. -- Fuzheado | Talk 20:46, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
- Looks much better now!--Isotope23 14:09, 5 June 2006 (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.
