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. Singularity 00:29, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Martin Gelin[edit]

Martin Gelin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

"Regular contributor" is not notable; a superficial Google provides nothing to set Gelin apart. 9Nak (talk) 14:59, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Fails WP:N because 'A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.' A quick Google Search on Martin Gelin returns no independent sources (just his own articles and blog posts). Littleteddy (roar!) 15:02, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Fails WP:N. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 15:03, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: General query results in self-blog posts and web-sites. Pretty much non-notable. seicer | talk | contribs 16:21, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above comments. Peter Fleet (talk) 12:15, 2 March 2008 (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.