Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lev Parnas

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. Not speedily as it has just come due for closure Star Mississippi 16:06, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lev Parnas

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

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

Obvious WP:BLP1E violation. Relevant details can be merged into Russian interference in the 2020 United States elections Simonm223 (talk) 15:47, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. We are way past that stage. He has become notable enough for his own article. Giving proper coverage (literally everything here) at Russian interference in the 2020 United States elections would create a due weight problem requiring a summary style splitting off, resulting in what we have here, so there is no sense in deleting this article. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 15:59, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Again, notable for a single event only. That it's a widely covered event doesn't change anything. Simonm223 (talk) 16:19, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Conspiracy theories, Crime, Politics, Judaism, Ukraine, Florida, Michigan, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:32, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep BLP1E requires three conditions to be met. #3, The event is not significant or the individual's role was either not substantial or not well documented, is not met. The event is significant and his role in it is substantial and well documented. Also #2, The person otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual, does not appear to be met. He just testified in front of Congress recently. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:47, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, perhaps SNOW? Per Muboshgu, this is a clear case of WP:NOTBLP1E. Jfire (talk) 16:55, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep There are obviously enough sources about Parnas to establish his notability, his role was substantial and well enough documented – resulting in this long article – and Russian interference in the 2020 United States elections is obviously long enough itself that that the substantial content here cannot be suitably merged. Reywas92^Talk 17:20, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Muboshgu, most of the WP:BLP1E criteria don't apply. hinnk (talk) 02:08, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Muboshgu. Sal2100 (talk) 16:31, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Muboshgu. There are enough sources documenting the substantial role of Mr. Parnas in Russian interference in the 2020 United States elections — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chamalejo (talk • contribs) 17:59, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep. Blatant abuse of BLP1E, lack of WP:BEFORE. He has had extensive and significant coverage over the past 8 years. Bearian (talk) 14:32, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Please close early. Based on a look at the OP's user pages, I can not assume good faith, nor calling out an experienced editor that they are adhering to our neutral point of view. Wikipedia is not a place to grind your axe or stand and scream on a soap box while wearing your vatnik. Bearian (talk) 14:37, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As someone who agrees this should be a WP:SNOW close, I think your comments here are inappropriate and counterproductive. hinnk (talk) 17:33, 10 April 2024 (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.