Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Back

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. ✗plicit 04:59, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Back

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

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Michael Back (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Only 1 article links to this. Just seems to be a run of the mill lawyer with most sources being primary and not SIGCOV. Nothing in Australian database trove either. Fails WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 03:45, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Law, and Australia. LibStar (talk) 03:45, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Environment. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:46, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: no articles about him except articles that were published by employer. 🄻🄰 14:35, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - we are not LinkedIn. Every source is by his employer or a listing in a directory. Therefore, the page lacks significant coverage in reliable sources. Bearian (talk) 11:41, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. These two articles in The Courier-Mail [1] and The Sydney Morning Herald [2] were the best sources I could find, but they're both heavily based on quotes, and the former doesn't really provide SIGCOV of Back. I don't see enough for GNG. MCE89 (talk) 12:00, 18 July 2025 (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.