Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Papali'i

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:06, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

James Papali'i

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Person of marginal notability, and according to the talk page he has requested that his article be deleted gadfium 22:44, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. 22:44, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. 22:44, 10 September 2013 (UTC)-gadfium 22:44, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This article looks like it was created by someone with a COI who tried to delete negative material and failing that tried to have the article deleted. While that is insufficient cause for deletion on its own, the subject of this is to minor to deserve an article in the first place. I feel that they fail WP:POLITICIAN as the sources provided don't seem to constitute "significant coverage". DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 23:43, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This article was requested to be deleted by the living person of the biography as we were just trying to contribute this is entirely hypocritical you choose a proposal for deletion when the person is not noteworthy but as soon as you have the opportunity to demonise someone you decide to keep the article. This is prejudice and based on racial profiling that Wikipedia New Zealand is all too common for you should hold your head in shame. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Manamangere (talk • contribs) 01:58, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note - You mean you created the article and removed the proposal for it to be deleted. But then when somebody added some negative facts to the article you had your head slapped around by somebody with a bit more political experience who pointed out that this whole thing was a net negative for the subject. But don't worry because although I pointed this little affair out to a few bloggers they don't seem interested. However accusing everybody of racism might put it into their radar yet. - SimonLyall (talk) 11:34, 12 September 2013 (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.