Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greg Secker

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. Daniel (talk) 23:57, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Greg Secker

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

I can find little independent coverage of this BLP, coverage of Secker in reliable sources is entirely focused of scepticism of his courses, with accompanying rebuttals from Secker; see Financial Times [1] and [2] The Guardian [3] and BBC [4] Other citations seem to be promotional and/or self written. No Swan So Fine (talk) 14:17, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. No Swan So Fine (talk) 14:17, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Self-promotion, little seems notable about him. Oaktree b (talk) 15:07, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:07, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete BBC article is good, but there is just not enough here to meet WP:GNG. Peter303x (talk) 23:51, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Seems like a promotional text with weak sources. It's WP:TOOSOON for him. --Mhhossein ^talk 12:37, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete a non-notable businessman.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:58, 3 February 2021 (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.