Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oggi Tomic

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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 03:56, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oggi Tomic

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

The original rationale given for deletion, by Munjanes, was "irrelevant content, personal commercial". It seems that this subject truly is non-notable, as there are not a lot of references other than social media sites, as well as no news references at all. Epicgenius (talk) 13:56, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:55, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:56, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:56, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, → Call me Hahc21 04:21, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I couldn't find much of anything by way of significant coverage in independent reliable sources and Wikipedia is WP:NOTLINKEDIN so I can see any reason we should have an article about the subject. Stalwart111 05:00, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Like Stalwart111, I searched for the kind of coverage that would show that he is notable, and came up with nothing. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:49, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Article written by this person himself (can be seen in article history), has no coverage in public media, just trying to make self commercial. --Lighthouse01 (talk) 16:33, 19 March 2014 (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.