Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zac Poonen (3rd nomination)

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. ⇌ Jake Wartenberg 07:58, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Zac Poonen

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

Zac Poonen was deleted in 2006 after the first nomination, due to lack of notability. It was deleted again in 2010 for the same reason. The current version still has no reliable independent sources to verfiy/substantiate Poonen's notability as per Wikipedia policy. Google searches will reveal many self-published hits (books, blogs, own media), but there are very few, if any, secondary sources where independent sources are talking about him. The information in the article, therefore, cannot be properly verified and therefore also fails Wikipedia's verifiability requirements. Wikipeterproject (talk) 02:08, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Unsourced BLP and already a two-time loser at AfD. Carrite (talk) 08:03, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:55, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:55, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:55, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Clear vanity BLP with no substantive claim to notability. Three failed AFDs also probably mean the closing admin should salt the title. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 21:16, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt per above. Automatic Strikeout (T • C) 02:35, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt. Wiki editors shouldn't have to waste their time deleting the same articles for the same offenses over and over.METOKNOWONLY (talk) 02:54, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to write an article on an Evangelist Zac Poonen. He is quite famous for his Ministry and through his churches world wide. I dont understand why is it getting nominated for deletion with an invalid reason "lacking notability". He has written more than 25 books for which he doesnt ask for any royalty. I understand that Wikipedia's notable guidelines are different and stringent inorder to avaoid unnecessary content on the web. But I believe Zac Poonen definitely deserve a page on Wikipedia. I came to this conclusion based on the other articles I see on famous persons on Wikipedia. I urge whom so ever concern that Zac Poonen is also as famous as other Evangalists listed on Wikipedia.

Please help me how to get the Page about Zac Poonen get published on Wikipedia permanently without any debates or hurdles. I respect the intention of the reviewers and the deletion policy. At the same time, I need the page to be published avoiding nominations for deletion by the editors. I understand editord do not have the time to review the article again and again. I am sorry for troubling them. But please help me. Thanks, Abhinesh

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.