Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Setrak Setrakian

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. J04n(talk page) 16:31, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Setrak Setrakian

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

Barely-sourced BLP with the only "source" relating to allegedly passing off someone else's music as his own on a Web site. A quick Google found no independent reliable sources that discussed this person in any significant context. Unencyclopedic. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 17:26, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per BLP-1E, the 1E being the scandal controversy ALLUDED TO HERE. The biography is more or less limited to the scandal. Otherwise failing GNG. Carrite (talk) 17:36, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - subject lacks notability outside of scandal.THD3 (talk) 21:55, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lebanon-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:20, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Armenia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:20, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:20, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:20, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Given the allegations linked by Carrite we need to be extra-careful regarding verifiability of information: often we allow primary sources for simple factual data concerning education and employment but I don't think we should do so here. In any case, nothing in the article looks like a claim of notability under WP:NMUSIC or any other criterion. And there is no evidence of WP:PERP's "sustained coverage of the event in reliable secondary sources which persists beyond contemporaneous news coverage". —David Eppstein (talk) 00:50, 30 May 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.