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. plicit 23:49, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Adelbert Bucher

[edit]
Adelbert Bucher (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article created by a COI editor and promoted from AFC by a now-indefblocked sockpuppet; subject is non-notable chocolatier with insufficient in-depth coverage in reliable sources. BD2412 T 23:17, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:47, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  1. https://bwhotelier.businessworld.in/article/Initiating-Creating-and-Conceptualising/28-06-2017-120970/ (passing mention
  2. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/bombay-times/lindt-chef-makes-mumbai-chocolate-lovers-drool/articleshow/29584871.cms (focus of article)
  3. https://www.gettyimages.ca/detail/news-photo/view-of-the-taj-mahal-made-by-adelbert-bucher-from-white-news-photo/98306289 photos, does that suggest notability?
  4. https://www.forbesindia.com/interview/ask-the-insider/is-chocolate-good-for-the-skin/12272/1 interview
  5. http://archive.indianexpress.com/news/white-magic/599028/ (reliant on quotes)
  6. https://www.thehindu.com/life-and-style/Recreating-the-Taj/article11642234.ece includes quotes
  7. https://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-charminar-monument-replicated-in-chocolate-1443328 includes quotes
  8. https://www.newindianexpress.com/cities/chennai/2010/nov/22/the-chocolate-taj-mahal-205002.html
Before I !vote, I'm wondering what people think of the coverage in these (and other) sources. CT55555 (talk) 01:02, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I would suspect that the existence of this article is part of the same PR drive. BD2412 T 02:53, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'd like to see more feedback on the articles found by CT55555 and whether they establish some level on notability or are just, as BD2412 implies, PR drivel.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:05, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.