Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jaliya Wickramasuriya

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 keep. Noting that none of the cited discussions concerning notability of diplomats was ever formally closed with a clear consensus. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:49, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jaliya Wickramasuriya

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

Fails WP:BIO and WP:DIPLOMAT, simply being a former ambassador for a country does not confer automatic notability. Also just because he is the cousin of a former president does not make him notable - see WP:NOTINHERITED. Dan arndt (talk) 08:59, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sri Lanka-related deletion discussions. Dan arndt (talk) 09:03, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Dan arndt (talk) 09:03, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. Dan arndt (talk) 09:03, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I believe an ambassadorial position makes him pass WP:POLITICIAN. I believe any ambassador is notable, and I am not aware of any AfD deleting their bio. Thoughts? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:24, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ambassadors are definitely not inherently notable, quite a few have been deleted. LibStar (talk) 09:34, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Piotrus as per WP:DIPLOMAT any individual (including any diplomat) needs to meet the criteria under WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO and not just be solely reliant on the fact that they were a diplomat (in this case an ambassador). After going through the article there is little there that supports him being considered as notable. Dan arndt (talk) 09:51, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I read WP:DIPLOMAT and it is an essay, not a policy. In my opinion ambassadors pass WP:POLITICIAN and should be auto-notable by the virtue of their position. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:57, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

again you are arguing inherent notability. in fact there was a discussion to give ambassadors inherent notability which gained no consensus. LibStar (talk) 11:41, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

delete fails WP:BIO. no inherent notability in being ambassador. Coverage merely confirms he held the role. LibStar (talk) 09:34, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non-notable individual. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 16:19, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:JUSTNOTNOTABLE. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:28, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep If being ambassador to the USA isn't notable enough, a quick Google search shows that he passes WP:GNG.--obi2canibe^{talk contr} 17:44, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

please show the actual outcome of your search WP:MUSTBESOURCES. LibStar (talk) 07:18, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's at the top of this Afd but here you go: Google. Includes over 400 news links.--obi2canibe^{talk contr} 11:06, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

please list actual sources rather than routine coverage. Most of that coverage is not in depth . Please also read WP:GOOGLEHITS LibStar (talk) 12:03, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See below for some source examples. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:31, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Ambassadors are not presumed notable. The sources are not enough to pass GNG.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:39, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Ambassador of any country to the United States is clearly notable. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:17, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Being an ambassador to the United States does not make an individual notable. Dan arndt (talk) 05:48, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

agree with Dan. You can't state something is automatically notable without referring to an actual guideline which says that. LibStar (talk) 13:05, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - per WP:GNG, and WP:POLITICIAN. IDONTLIKEIT is irrelevant.BabbaQ (talk) 18:35, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WP:POLITICIAN does not grant inherent notability to ambassadors. LibStar (talk) 08:03, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 18:14, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:GNG. Article makes no claim of notability except possibly ambassador to US which is not sufficient. MB 21:17, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Check out WP:NEXIST. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:29, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – The subject meets WP:BASIC per a review of available sources, and has received coverage for being a former ambassador, for his service as Consul General of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka in Los Angeles, and for his role as company President of Ceylon Royal Teas. Source examples include, but are not limited to those listed below. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:11, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References

Keep - while we have tended to delete ambassadors from small nations, we have tended to keep those who have held multiple posts or to/from large nations. The subject was ambassador to three major posts, including a stint in as ambassador to the United States, serving in DC, a diplomatic hot spot. Bearian (talk) 18:50, 19 September 2016 (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.